The end of the Cold War was welcomed as a new era of peace and security in which swords would be transformed into plows, former enemies into friends, and the world would witness a new dawn of universal love, peace and happiness. Of course, none of that happened. What happened is that the AngloZionist Empire convinced itself that it had “won the Cold War” and that it now was in charge. Of the entire planet, no less. And why not? It had built anywhere between 700 to 1000 military bases (depending on your definition of “base”) worldwide and it had split up the entire globe into several areas of exclusive responsibility named “commands”. The last time any power had mustered the megalomania needed to distribute various parts of the planet to to different commands was the Papacy in 1494 with its (in)famous “Treaty of Tordesillas”.

And to make that point abundantly clear, the Empire decided to make an example and unleashed its power against tiny Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia, a founding member of the Non-Aligned Movement was viciously attacked and dismembered, creating an immense wave of refugees, mostly Serbs, which the democratic and civilized world chose to ignore. Furthermore, the Empire unleashed yet another war, this time in Russia, which pitched the semi-comatose Eltsin regime against what would later become a key part of al-Qaeda, ISIS and Daesh: the Wahabis in Chechnia. Again, many hundreds of thousands of “invisible refugees” resulted from that war too, but they were also largely ignored by the democratic and civilized world, especially the ethnic Russians. It took Russia a full decade to finally crush this Wahabi-Takfiri insurgency but, eventually, Russia prevailed. And by that time, the AngloZionists had turned their attention elsewhere: the US and Israeli “deep states” jointly planned and executed the 9/11 false flag operation which gave them the perfect excuse to declare a “global war on terror” which basically gave the AngloZionists a worldwide “license to kill” à la 007, except that in this case the target was not a person, but entire countries.

We all know what followed: Iraq, Afghanistan, Philippines, Somalia, Ethiopia, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, Mali, Pakistan, Syria, Libya, the Ukraine – everywhere the US was at war, whether officially or covertly. The spectrum ranged from an (attempted) complete invasion of a country (Afghanistan) to the support of various terrorist groups (Iran, Syria) to the full financing and management of a Nazi regime (the Ukraine). The US also gave full support to the Wahabis in their long crusade against the Shia (KSA, Bahrain, Yemen, Syria, Iran). What all these wars had in common is that they were all completely illegal – the US and any ad hoc “coalition of the willing” became an acceptable substitute for the UN Security Council.

Here again it is important to remind everybody – especially those Muslims who rejoiced at the bombing of the Serbs – that this all began with the completely illegal destruction of Yugoslavia followed by an even more illegal bombing of Serbia.

Of course, the Empire also suffered from a few humiliating defeats: in 2006 Hezbollah inflicted on Israel what might well be one of the most humiliating military defeats in modern history while in 2008 a tiny force of truly heroic Ossetian fighters backed by a comparatively small Russian military contingent (only a small part of the Russian military was involved) made mincemeat of the the US-trained and US-funded Georgian military: the war was over in 4 days. Still, by and large, the first decade of the 21st century saw a triumph of the law of the jungle over international law and a full vindication of the age old principle of “might makes right”.

Logically, these were also the years when the US diplomacy basically ceased to exist. The sole function of US diplomats remained the delivery of ultimatums “comply or else…” and the Empire simply stopped negotiating about anything. Seasoned and sophisticated diplomats like James Baker were replaced either by psychopaths like Madelaine Albright, Hillary Clinton and Samantha Power, or by mediocre non-entities like John Kerry and Susan Rice. After all, how sophisticated must one be to threaten, bully and deliver ultimatums? Things got so bad that the Russians openly complained about the “lack of professionalism” of their US counterparts.

As for the poor Russians with their pathetic insistence that the norms of international law must be observed, they looked hopelessly passé. I won’t even mention the European politicians here. They were best characterized by the Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, who called them “great supine protoplasmic invertebrate jellies‘.

But then, something changed. Dramatically.

The failure of force

Suddenly everything went south. Every single US victory somehow turned into a defeat: from Afghanistan to Libya, every US ‘success’ had somehow morphed itself into a situation where the best option, if not the only one left, was to “declare victory and leave”. This begs the obvious question “what happened?”.

The first obvious conclusion is that the US forces and their so-called “allies” have very little staying power. While they are reasonably skilled at invading a country, they then rapidly lose control of most of it. It is one thing to invade a country, but quite another to administer it, nevermind rebuilt it. It turns out that US-led “coalitions of the willing” were unable to get anything done.

Second, it became obvious that the enemy which was supposedly defeated had really only gone into hiding and was waiting for a better time to come back with a vengeance. Iraq is the perfect example of that: far form being really “defeated”, the Iraqi Army (wisely) chose to disband itself and come back in the shape of a formidable Sunni insurrection which itself gradually morphed into ISIS. But Iraq was not an isolated case. The same happened pretty much everywhere.

ORDER IT NOW

There are those who will object and that that the US does not care if it controls a country or if it destroys it, as long as the other guy does not get to “win”. I disagree. Yes, the US will always prefer the destruction of a country to an outright victory of the other side, but this does not mean that the US does not prefer to control a country if possible. In other words, when a country sinks into chaos and violence this is not a US victory, but most definitely a US loss.

What the US missed is that diplomacy makes the use of force much more effective. First, careful diplomacy makes it possible to build a wide coalition of countries willing to support collective action. Second, diplomacy also makes it possible to reduce the number of countries which openly oppose collective action. Does anybody remember that Syria actually sent forces to support US troops against Saddam Hussein in Desert Storm? Sure, they did not make a big difference, but their presence gave the US the peace of mind that Syria would at least not overtly oppose the US policy. By getting the Syrians to support Desert Storm, James Backer made it very hard for the Iraqis to argue that this was an anti-Arab, anti-Muslim or even an anti-Baathist coalition and he made Saddam Hussein look completely isolated (even when the Iraqis began shooting missiles at Israel). Second, diplomacy makes it possible to reduce the overall amount of force used because “instant overkill” is not needed to show the enemy that you really mean business. Third, diplomacy is the necessary tool to achieve legitimacy and legitimacy is crucial when engaged in a long, protracted, conflict. Finally, the consensus which emerges from a successful diplomatic effort prevents the rapid erosion of the public support for a military effort. But all these factors were ignored by the USA in the GWOT (Global War on Terror) and the “Arab Spring” revolutions which now have come to a screeching halt.

A diplomatic triumph for Russia

This week saw a true diplomatic triumph for Russia culminating in Friday’s multilateral negotiations in Vienna which brought together the foreign ministers of Russia, the US, Turkey and Saudi Arabia. The fact that this meeting took place right after Assad’s visit to Moscow clearly indicates that the sponsors of Daesh and al-Qaeda are now forced to negotiate on Moscow’s terms. How did that happen?

As I have been mantrically repeating it since the Russian operation in Syria began, the Russian military force actually sent to Syria is very small. Yes, it is a very effective one, but it is still very small. In fact, the members of the Russian Duma have announced that the costs of the entire operation will probably fit in the normal Russian Defense budget which has monies allocated for “training”. However, what the Russian have achieved with this small intervention is rather amazing, not only in military terms, but especially in political terms.

Not only has the Empire (very reluctantly) had to accept that Assad would have to stay in power for the foreseeable future, but Russia is now gradually but inexorably building up a real regional coalition which is willing to fight Daesh on the same side as the Syrian government forces. Even before the Russian operation began, Russia had the support of Syria, Iran, Iraq and Hezbollah. There are also strong signs that the Kurds are basically also willing to work with Russia and Assad. On Friday it was announced that Jordan would also coordinate some as of yet unspecified military actions with Russia and that a special coordination center will be set up in Amman. There are also very strong rumors that Egypt will also join the Russian-lead coalition. There are also signs that Russia and Israel are also, if not working together, at least not working against each other: the Russian and Israelis have created a special line to directly talk to each other on a military level. The bottom line is this: regardless of the sincerity of the different parties, everybody in the region now feels a strong pressure to at least not look opposed to the Russian effort. That, by itself, is a huge triumph for Russian diplomacy.

Putin’s secret weapon: the truth

The current situation is, of course, totally unacceptable for the Global Hegemon: not only has the US-lead coalition of 62 countries managed to conduct 22,000 strikes with nothing to show for it, but the comparatively smaller Russian coalition has managed to completely displace the Empire and negate all its plans. And the most formidable weapon used by Putin in his proxy war with the USA was not even a military one, but simply speaking the truth.

Both at his UN speech and, this week, at his speech at the Valdai Conference Putin has done what no other world leader before has ever dared doing: he openly call the US regime incompetent, irresponsible, lying, hypocritical and terminally arrogant. That kind of public “dissing” has had a huge impact worldwide because by the time Putin said these words more or less everybody knew that this was absolutely true.

The US does treat all its allies as “vassals” (see Valdai speech) and the US is the prime culprit for all the terrible crises the world now has to face (see UN speech). What Putin did is basically say “the Emperor is naked”. In comparison, Obama’s lame speech was comically pathetic. What we are witnessing now is an amazing turn around. After decades marked by the “might makes right” principle advocated by the USA, suddenly we are in a situation where no amount of military might is of any use to a beleaguered President Obama: what use are 12 aircraft carriers when you personally look like a clown?

After 1991 it appeared that the only superpower left was so powerful and unstoppable that it did not need to bother itself with such minor things like diplomacy or respect for international law. Uncle Sam felt like he was the sole ruler, the Planetary Hegemon. China was just a “big Walmart”, Russia a “gas station” and Europe an obedient poodle (the latter is, alas, quite true). The myth of US invincibility was just that, of course, a myth: since WWII the USA has not won a single real war (Grenada or Panama do not qualify). In fact, the US military fared even much worse in Afghanistan that the under-trained, under-equipped, under-fed and under-financed Soviet 40th Army which, at least, kept all the major cities and main roads under Soviet control and which did some meaningful development of the civilian infrastructure of the country (which the US is still using in 2015). Nevertheless, the myth of US invincibility only really came crashing down when Russia put a stop to it in 2013 by preventing a US assault on Syria by a mix of diplomatic and military means. Uncle Sam was livid, but could do nothing about besides triggering a coup in Kiev and an economic war against Russia, neither of which have succeeded in their goals.

As for Putin, instead of being deterred by all the US efforts, he invited Assad to Moscow.

Assad’s Moscow visit as yet another indicator of US impotence

This week’s visit by Assad was nothing short of extraordinary. Not only did the Russian succeed in getting Assad out of Syria and to Moscow and then back without the bloated US intelligence community noticing anything, but unlike most heads of state, Assad spoke face to face to some of the most powerful men in Russia.

First, Assad met with Putin, Lavrov and Shoigu. They spoke for a total of three hours (which, by itself, is quite remarkable). They were later joined by Medvedev for a private dinner. Guess who else joined them? Mikhail Fradkov, Head of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service, and Nikolai Patrushev, Head of the Russian Security Council:

Normally, heads of state do not meet personally with men like Fradkov or Patrushev and, instead, they send their own experts. In this case, however, the topic discussed was important enough to 1) get Assad personally to the Kremlin and 2) get all the top players in the Kremlin around the same table for a personal discussion with Assad.

Obviously, not a word came out from this meeting, but there are two main theories circulating out there about what was discussed.

The first theory says that Assad was told in no unclear terms that his days were numbered and that he would have to leave.

The second one says the exact opposite: that Assad was brought in to signal to him, and the US, that he had the full support of Russia.

I don’t believe that either one of these is correct, but the second one is, I think, probably closer to the truth. After all, if the goal was to tell Assad that he had to go, a simple phone call would have been enough, really. Maybe a visit by Lavrov. As for “backing Assad”, that would go in direct contradiction with what the Russians have been saying all along: they are not backing “Assad” as a person, although they do recognize him as the sole legitimate President of Syria, but they are backing the right of the Syrian people to be the only ones to decide who should be in power in Syria. And that, by the way, is something that Assad himself has also agreed to (according to Putin). Likewise, Assad has also agreed to work with any non-Daesh opposition forces willing to fight against Daesh alongside the Syrian military (again, according to Putin).

No, while I believe that the meeting between Assad and Putin was, at least in part, a message to the USA and the others so-called “friends of Syria”, indicating that their “Assad must go” plan had failed, I believe that the main purpose of the behind-closed-doors meeting with all the top leaders of Russia was something else: my guess is that what was discussed was a major and long term alliance between Russia and Syria which would formally revive the kind of alliance Syria had with the Soviet Union in the past. While I can only speculate about the exact terms of such an alliance, it is my guess that this plan, probably coordinated with Iran has two major aspects:

a) military component: Daesh must be crushed.

b) political component: Syria will not be allowed to fall under US control.

Considering that the Russian military operation is assumed by most Russian experts to be scheduled to last about 3 months, we are dealing here with separate, middle to long term, plan which will require the Syrian armed forces to be rebuilt while Russia, Iran and Iraq jointly coordinate the struggle against Daesh. And, indeed, it was announced on Friday that Iraq had authorized the Russian military to strike at Daesh inside the Iraqi territory. It sure looks like the Russian operation has acted as a catalyst for a region paralyzed by US hypocrisy and incompetence and that the days of Daesh are numbered

Too early to celebrate, but a watershed moment nonetheless

Still, it is way too early to celebrate. The Russians cannot do it all by themselves, and it will be incumbent upon the Syrians and their allies to fight Daesh, one small town at a time. Only boots on the ground will really liberate Syria from Daesh and only true Islam will be able to defeat the Takfiri ideology. This will take a time.

Furthermore, it would be irresponsible to underestimate the Empire’s determination and ability to prevent Russia from looking like “the winner” – that is something which the US imperial ego, raised in centuries of imperial hubris and ignorance, will never be able to cope with. After all, how can the “indispensable nation” accept that the world does not need it at all and that others can even openly oppose and prevail? We can expect the US to use all its (still huge) power to try to thwart and sabotage every Russian or Syrian initiative.

ORDER IT NOW

Still, the recent events are the mark that the era of “might makes right” has come to an end and that the notion that the US is an “indispensable nation” or world hegemon has now lost any credibility. After decades in the dark, international diplomacy and the international law are finally becoming relevant again. It is my hope that this is the beginning of a process which will see the USA undergo the same evolution as so many other countries (including Russia) have undergone in the past: from being an empire to becoming a “normal country” again. Alas, when I look at the 2016 Presidential race I get the feeling that this will still be a very long process.

Leaving aside Catholic/Protestant vs Orthodox, Russia is more 'Western' than not Western I would say. Bashar Assad & the Ba'ath are a lot more 'Western' than US allies like the Saudi King & the Wahabbis.
I'd say that what we see is modern Civilisation fighting back against postmodern US-Wahabbi Barbarism.

These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.

this site unz is supposed to be a ” Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media.”

OK, fine. Yes, SOME of the articles here do indeed fit that description. But really this site has only two types of articles, for the most part: 1) articles that deal with immigration and political correctness and how the liberals like them and are hypocrites about those two areas, and 2) middle east foreign affairs.

What about all the other stuff? And why are there so many articles about middle eastern foreign policy stuff here? I almost guarantee you that most of these articles are written by authors who get paid to write those sorts of articles.

Here are some interesting areas that almost NEVER get written about: why is there this huge political apartheid in american politics? What I am talking about is how the liberal political tribe is not allowed to say anything at all negative about affirmative action and mass immigration. And how the conservative political tribe is not allowed to say anything good about social security or medicare or nationalized healthcare.

It is a certifiable FACT that the vast majority of americans like social security and medicare and would NEVER want to have them abolished. The GOP politicians will not vote against them. Carson just said something about abolishing medicare, and I guarantee you his candidacy will end as soon as people actually start voting because of what he said. But no one in the media will admit it.

But there is hardly ever anything in the media about this rigidly enforced ideological apartheid. Why is no one talking about this? And hardly anyone ever reads or comments on this middle eastern policy articles here on this site. But every day there are more of them. Same thing for the media when it comes to foreign policy news. Hardly anyone really cares about it, but the media keeps cramming it down our throats.

As far as I am concerned there are no sites anywhere that really get into the really interesting issues.

"why are there so many articles flooding the media and the internet about what is going on in the middle east?

I am 58 years old, have served in the military, am well-educated, and, really, I just don’t give a fat, happy damn about what happens over there.

It’s like they want to manufacture this controversy and interest in what is going on over there.

Yawn. Who cares? They can blow themselves sky high for all I care."

For someone who purports to be so bored about the Middle East, you sure do read a lot of articles on unz.com dealing with the Middle East and commenting on them. Since you seem to be so dissatisfied with Mr. Unz's excellent site, maybe you should start your own. As for myself, I find The Saker's blogs and Israel Shamir's blogs on Syria and the Middle East valuable reading which one doesn't find anywhere else.

The elites intentionally promote these taboos within their respective domains as forms of controlled opposition.

Obviously any sensible nation will put the interests of its citizens over non-citizens. It will also reward ambition, creativity, hard-work and effeciency without letting people less endowed with these qualities to live in misery.

This is, broadly speaking, national socialism or a reasonable facsimile thereof.

The nation that most closely attained this ideal also sought to exterminate the people most opposed to this ideal. This nation was utterly vanquished after a massive war and then fully conquered and colonized. Three generations later, that nation is still run by elites openly hostile to its folk's interests and who tqke their marching orders from the same individuals that run the US.

The elites know they can't promote a party that gets everything wrong, so instead they promote two seperate parties that each get some things right and other things wrong. Then they pit these groups against each other, encouraging one group to label the other as "socialists" and "communists" and the other group to label its rivals as "racists", "misogynists", etc.

{As far as I am concerned there are no sites anywhere that really get into the really interesting issues.}

There is the golden opportunity for you to start such a site and get into really interesting issues.
Nobody forces anyone to either read or comment @UNZ.com
Ron Unz is paying for the upkeep of the site, so he and his team decide what issues to cover and which authors to invite to cover those issues.

The existence of these "inexplicables" in the West is indeed remarkable. Merkel, Cameron, Hollande, the Swedish trolls, and Obama invariably choose to favor foreigners over their "own" people and refuse to take the simplest of defensive measures against all immigration to the end that their nations are transformed and then destroyed.

The reason I read articles about Syria in particular is that the mantra "Assad must go" is manifestly absurd. Similarly, it's clear that our bombing of ISIS has been a charade and that our support for moderate terrorists in Syria is fatuous.

Accordingly, it is useful to understand the big picture if we pay attention to what those who are controlling things say and do in Syria. The US and Europe are empty spectacles of representative government and this can be made clear by studying the imperial mindset in operation on the "fringes."

What I am talking about is how the liberal political tribe is not allowed to say anything at all negative about affirmative action and mass immigration. And how the conservative political tribe is not allowed to say anything good about social security or medicare or nationalized healthcare.

Well immigration is for defeating labor and conservatives funding by business would dry up if they criticised it, so that leaves welfare for conservatives to complain about as if they represent the taxpayer. Private profit at the expense of the public subsidy of low wages is corporate welfare. Don't expect business's shills to claim credit for that.

The flurry of claims in the west that Russia’s position had changed and they were telling Assad to go is, to the perceptive, itself a sign that on the contrary, Russian support for the Syrian state is stronger than ever. The shamelessness of the western lie machine has few parallels in history.

“the Russians can’t do it alone”. Which, in today’s world can really mean watch the nation that is unmentioned in this article ….. China. Maybe not in terms of a direct military intervention. Of the pair that US lack of diplomacy is pushing together, Russia seems more suited for that role. But, if this all works out like The Saker suggests, then China coming in to help rebuild the country, its buildings and infrastructure and even to some extent its institutions, might end up being critical assistence in the longer terms. So, just remember to keep an eye on China. At this time, they certainly won’t oppose Russia, and if there are ways to help Russia without spending a lot of money or resources, then they would probably feel inclined. And to expand Chinese influence into a new part of the world would be in their interests as well. If Chinese aid and workers were noticeably helping to rebuilt Syria, then they would accomplish just that and not have to spend a huge fortune to do so, nor fight in a war.

Thanks for the words of support, Mikhas, but please understand that my role is not to inspire or discourage, but simply to offer the best analysis I can. Sure, I also have personal sympathies and hopes, but I try hard to set them aside and provide an honest analysis, whether it results in a standing ovation or a deluge of hate mail :-)
Concerning Syria, I am "very cautiously optimistic" even though I see tremendous risks and difficulties ahead.
Cheers!

Now that Russia looks better aligned with Western interests than NATO member Turkey is likely to be in the forseeable future why doesn’t the US wash its hands of the ME and hand over to Russia as long as Russia stops supporting East Ukrainian rebels and a few other little matters are dealt with?

Why do your comments always look to me like blabbering of a small child? Why don't you find it in yourself to leave the adults to comment here about the situation?

US and Israel created this mess for a good reason, why would they leave it now to Russia? That is so non-sensical? Even if the US may officially pretend that it does not care about the total failure of its Syria regime-change effort, it will be fighting tooth-and-nail to, at least, keep Iraq in its grip. The latest news is that the US has done more sorties over Iraq in the last couple of days than in the preceding months. This is just in the hope to keep Russia out of Iraq, because it has been invited in already.

Poor ISIS, from a US secret field force, they are turning into everybody's favorite punching bag (just ironic, those crazy Salafi mofos deserve much worse). In my view, now everything depends on Iran as the main counter-field-force to the crazy Salafis of the US. If Iran manages to make a big difference in the battlefield, then the opposing Syrian Sunni groups will rush to the negotiating table before they lose this last chance to get at least something for their protracted rebellion against Assad. They must be totally exhausted and truly disappointed at their US and Saudi backers.

"...as long as Russia stops supporting East Ukrainian rebels..."
Could you elaborate on why the Russian Federation should cease any support (already minimal) to an enclave on the RF border, which is not only mostly inhabited by ethnic Russians but which is also fighting for a democratic process of federalization in the context of the US-sponsored illegal regime that is laced with neo-Nazi elements? Should not a logical suggestion be like this: It is time for the US to get out from the Russian borders in Baltic states and Ukraine.
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/06/12/u-s-house-admits-nazi-role-in-ukraine/
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/07/04/is-the-u-s-training-neo-nazis-in-ukraine.html
http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/neo-nazis-receive-medals-kiev-after-being-condemned-us-congress/ri8009

{ Now that Russia looks better aligned with Western interests than NATO member Turkey}

Russia is not better aligned with Western interests.Russian and "Western"/Neocon interests are diametrically opposed. Russia threw a monkey wrench in the “Western” * interests, so Neocons have been forced to pay lip service of allegedly cooperating with Russia, to buy time and figure out what to do.Just before Russia appeared out of nowhere and disrupted Neocons’ final push to oust President Assad, the criminals were planning something big. Go read all the memes being spread about Turkey establishing so-called safe-zones on the ground in Syria (meaning, Turkish SOP of theft of Syrian lands with NATO backing), and establishing no-fly zones. Russia detected that NATO was going to go ahead and establish no-fly zones over Syrian airspace – an illegal, criminal act – and moved first and with lightening speed.ISIS throat-cutter sponsoring Neocon filth got the shock of their lives.

As to Ukraine: East Ukraine is the cradle of Russia, as in Kievan Rus. Not only should Russia not stop providing whatever little help she is providing to the freedom fighters of Novorossiya, but I expect once Syria is safe an secure from ISIS, Russia will force the issue about East Ukraine.

And all the other little matters are none of Neocons’ business: Neocons have lied and broken their promises to Gorbachev and Russia since the breakup of USSR. Neocons are attempting to establish NATO bases right on the border of Russia.Nothing is a little matter anymore with these criminal Neocons. Russia has been pushed far enough. The cruise missile salvo from the Caspian Sea was a message to the Neocons that things have changed: Russia is going to push back and in ways that will shock the Neocons meddlers.

Well, with a moniker like Wizard of Oz, perhaps it would be only appropriate to "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain"; i.e., your factually-challenged maunderings, as identified by those others who responded to them. Well, I suppose knocking them down is still the correct approach, on second thought.

this site unz is supposed to be a " Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media."

OK, fine. Yes, SOME of the articles here do indeed fit that description. But really this site has only two types of articles, for the most part: 1) articles that deal with immigration and political correctness and how the liberals like them and are hypocrites about those two areas, and 2) middle east foreign affairs.

What about all the other stuff? And why are there so many articles about middle eastern foreign policy stuff here? I almost guarantee you that most of these articles are written by authors who get paid to write those sorts of articles.

Here are some interesting areas that almost NEVER get written about: why is there this huge political apartheid in american politics? What I am talking about is how the liberal political tribe is not allowed to say anything at all negative about affirmative action and mass immigration. And how the conservative political tribe is not allowed to say anything good about social security or medicare or nationalized healthcare.

It is a certifiable FACT that the vast majority of americans like social security and medicare and would NEVER want to have them abolished. The GOP politicians will not vote against them. Carson just said something about abolishing medicare, and I guarantee you his candidacy will end as soon as people actually start voting because of what he said. But no one in the media will admit it.

But there is hardly ever anything in the media about this rigidly enforced ideological apartheid. Why is no one talking about this? And hardly anyone ever reads or comments on this middle eastern policy articles here on this site. But every day there are more of them. Same thing for the media when it comes to foreign policy news. Hardly anyone really cares about it, but the media keeps cramming it down our throats.

As far as I am concerned there are no sites anywhere that really get into the really interesting issues.

And I have to wonder why.

This is what you said in response to Israel Shamir’s recent blog:

“why are there so many articles flooding the media and the internet about what is going on in the middle east?

I am 58 years old, have served in the military, am well-educated, and, really, I just don’t give a fat, happy damn about what happens over there.

It’s like they want to manufacture this controversy and interest in what is going on over there.

Yawn. Who cares? They can blow themselves sky high for all I care.”

For someone who purports to be so bored about the Middle East, you sure do read a lot of articles on unz.com dealing with the Middle East and commenting on them. Since you seem to be so dissatisfied with Mr. Unz’s excellent site, maybe you should start your own. As for myself, I find The Saker’s blogs and Israel Shamir’s blogs on Syria and the Middle East valuable reading which one doesn’t find anywhere else.

While 9/11 was done by Al Qaeda and not a ‘false flag’ per se, there is a greater truth that the US leadership and Al Qaeda have always shared the same goal of spreading global chaos; Al Qaeda was essentially created by the USA in Afghanistan, backed by US allies Pakistan & Saudi Arabia, and they remain natural allies, as we see with the US attempts to ally with Al-Nusra against the Syrian government. Al Qaeda attacks on the West have been consistently used to further US goals of destroying secular Arab governments while leaving Saudi Arabia well alone. I remember the many years when the US under Bush II determinedly refused to do a single thing against Al Qaeda in Pakistan, denying they were there at all! To the extent there is a true Axis of Evil, it runs USA-Saudi-Pakistan-Al Qaeda-Daesh – with honorary roles for Turkey, and to an extent Israel too. Those nations who oppose the Axis, flawed and imperfect as they are, stand for Civilisation against Barbarism.

I quite agree with your astute summary of what has transpired, but why does the U.S. wish to destroy secular Arab governments? Is it an Israeli strategic preference, believing the replacement medieval jihad scum are more manageable due to their inherent incompetence, or is it romantic stupidity: Bush believing in the religion of peace and that the desire for freedom is written on every human heart, Barry Hussain Soetero remembering fondly his boyhood years in an Indonesian madrasa? It's utter folly and ignorance, either way.

The US government did 9/11. The laughably absurd USG conspiracy theory is physically impossible.

http://www.ae911truth.org

Be sure to see their list of thousands of architects, engineers, and other skilled professionals who are unwilling to accept the impossible.

Yet the US govt. cannot change laws of physics, the government's bizarre conspiracy theory is impossible.

And it's an established scientific fact that military grade nano-thermite was used in the 9/11 attack.
Military grade nano-thermite was found at the WTC by the USGS & Niels Harrit of Univ. of Copenhagen, and 8 more scientists.
http://www.ae911truth.org

'Muslims in caves' cannot make military grade nano-thermite.

What Science Says About the Destruction of World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2, and 7
http://www.beyondmisinformation.org/#beyond-misinformation

I would go further and say that this could well be a five hundred year cycle turn.

For five hundred years the West has been calling the shots. In Syria the East has drawn a line saying 'no more' to the West.

Leaving aside Catholic/Protestant vs Orthodox, Russia is more ‘Western’ than not Western I would say. Bashar Assad & the Ba’ath are a lot more ‘Western’ than US allies like the Saudi King & the Wahabbis.
I’d say that what we see is modern Civilisation fighting back against postmodern US-Wahabbi Barbarism.

I do not know but this is a bit too much Russian premature gloating from Saker. Personally, I am glad that Russia found resources to get involved and Putin found an absolutely most opportune moment possible – the refugee crisis. Thus Russia appears a problem-solver whereas the US, Israel, Turkey and Saudi are problem-makers. Those who do not like the US as the global bully are gloating justifiably at the global embarrassment of the Israeli controlled country. Yet, because Saker does these weekly summaries, Russia has gotten the low hanging fruit only. It has managed to complicate and even change the game of the Dark Alliance. But the only way to achieve a high value result at low cost would be to complement this sudden change in the military situation with a diplomatic success: get all Syrian parties to negotiate, which automatically excludes the mercenaires of the Dark Alliance who are virtually all non-Syrians. This is why RT, for example, mentions today the FSA willingness to negotiate as the #1 piece of news. Russia is simply desperate for political negotiations, or all benefit of its sudden knight-on-a-white-horse intervention in Syria will dissipate and costs will mount as it drags on.

Putin is a consummate chess master, but can he pull off this amazing hat trick right in the face of US, Israel, Turkey and Saudi, who will do anything to sabotage a negotiated Syrian own political solution.

Finally, to state something obvious – the US has painted itself into a corner in Syria, mainly because of an internal war between Israeli war hawks, the neocons, and other assorted Washington riff-raff versus Obama. This internal war came to a draw and resulted in a half-baked US lead regime-change operation in Syria (unlike Libya). Simply, the US regime change operation took too long and this gave a wonderful chance for the Russians to get involved. Obama miscalculated that ISIS will bring down Assad, that Alawites and Sunnis would both lose and only Israel would win. The problem solves itself. Most of all, this would keep US clean of the responsibility for the ensuing terror, atrocities and chaos of an ISIS win in Syria. Well, this game plan is totally dead now.

Now that Russia looks better aligned with Western interests than NATO member Turkey is likely to be in the forseeable future why doesn't the US wash its hands of the ME and hand over to Russia as long as Russia stops supporting East Ukrainian rebels and a few other little matters are dealt with?

Why do your comments always look to me like blabbering of a small child? Why don’t you find it in yourself to leave the adults to comment here about the situation?

US and Israel created this mess for a good reason, why would they leave it now to Russia? That is so non-sensical? Even if the US may officially pretend that it does not care about the total failure of its Syria regime-change effort, it will be fighting tooth-and-nail to, at least, keep Iraq in its grip. The latest news is that the US has done more sorties over Iraq in the last couple of days than in the preceding months. This is just in the hope to keep Russia out of Iraq, because it has been invited in already.

Poor ISIS, from a US secret field force, they are turning into everybody’s favorite punching bag (just ironic, those crazy Salafi mofos deserve much worse). In my view, now everything depends on Iran as the main counter-field-force to the crazy Salafis of the US. If Iran manages to make a big difference in the battlefield, then the opposing Syrian Sunni groups will rush to the negotiating table before they lose this last chance to get at least something for their protracted rebellion against Assad. They must be totally exhausted and truly disappointed at their US and Saudi backers.

Because you are an immature narcissist with no idea of what it takes to persuade people (gratuitous rudeness being one marker of that trait) . I presume that you are not a retired person but that the evident time on your hands to emit flatulent pontifications to the blogosphere comes from your being unemployed and unemployable - at least in any position or occupation which conforms to your ego's requirements.

Perhaps your greater problem for present purposes is that, while you claim working knowledge of several languages, you lack mastery of English. That perhaps explains why you combine rudeness with a long boring statement of the obvious or plausible as a supposed answer to my brief remark intended to point to the big explanatory gap needing to be filled when one considers why the hell the US should rationally be bothering with the Arabs at all in an era of efficient fracking and the coming electric vehicle. To say, by way of addition to the existing fifty thousand words (no exaggeration if one adds up UR comments), that it is all about the malign interests of the Zionists/neocons doesn't add much value.

While 9/11 was done by Al Qaeda and not a 'false flag' per se, there is a greater truth that the US leadership and Al Qaeda have always shared the same goal of spreading global chaos; Al Qaeda was essentially created by the USA in Afghanistan, backed by US allies Pakistan & Saudi Arabia, and they remain natural allies, as we see with the US attempts to ally with Al-Nusra against the Syrian government. Al Qaeda attacks on the West have been consistently used to further US goals of destroying secular Arab governments while leaving Saudi Arabia well alone. I remember the many years when the US under Bush II determinedly refused to do a single thing against Al Qaeda in Pakistan, denying they were there at all! To the extent there is a true Axis of Evil, it runs USA-Saudi-Pakistan-Al Qaeda-Daesh - with honorary roles for Turkey, and to an extent Israel too. Those nations who oppose the Axis, flawed and imperfect as they are, stand for Civilisation against Barbarism.

I quite agree with your astute summary of what has transpired, but why does the U.S. wish to destroy secular Arab governments? Is it an Israeli strategic preference, believing the replacement medieval jihad scum are more manageable due to their inherent incompetence, or is it romantic stupidity: Bush believing in the religion of peace and that the desire for freedom is written on every human heart, Barry Hussain Soetero remembering fondly his boyhood years in an Indonesian madrasa? It’s utter folly and ignorance, either way.

Seems to be both (although I don't think Obama personally gives a damn either way, the only thing he actually cares about is US black-vs-white politics). Neocons seem to believe that Global Democratic Transformation - global chaos - is both good for Israel and good for the world. In the absence of a real peer competitor the US military-industrial complex likes global chaos because it helps justify big procurement budgets.
However my impression is that while Likud has a reality-based (if IMO mistaken) view that chaos is good for Israel, the American leadership class is motivated by a non-reality-based ideology that they cannot discard no matter how many times they are proved wrong. By and large they do believe that everyone should be and can be a Liberal Democrat and that Liberal Democracy must and will arise from the destruction of existing societies. There is a heavy dose of Frankfurt School Marxism mixed with Wilsonian Liberal post-Puritan idealism.

but why does the U.S. wish to destroy secular Arab governments? Is it an Israeli strategic preference, believing the replacement medieval jihad scum are more manageable due to their inherent incompetence

A very pertinent question. Israel's strategic preferences made sense based on their threat experience:

Ragtag arab jihadis are preferable to secular arab nationalists. Thus the focus on Saddam and Assad instead of al-Qaeda and ISIS.

Sunni jihadis backed by the Saudis are preferable to shia jihadis backed by Iran.

The sunni monarchies of the arabian peninsula, of Saudi Arabia and Jordan in particular, are far more preferable to the shia theocracy of Iran.

Putin's entry into Syria to defend the secularist Assad, with the shias of Iran and Iraq as allies, has seriously scrambled the situation and Israel is now forced to rethink it's strategic preferences.

Now that Russia looks better aligned with Western interests than NATO member Turkey is likely to be in the forseeable future why doesn't the US wash its hands of the ME and hand over to Russia as long as Russia stops supporting East Ukrainian rebels and a few other little matters are dealt with?

“…as long as Russia stops supporting East Ukrainian rebels…”
Could you elaborate on why the Russian Federation should cease any support (already minimal) to an enclave on the RF border, which is not only mostly inhabited by ethnic Russians but which is also fighting for a democratic process of federalization in the context of the US-sponsored illegal regime that is laced with neo-Nazi elements? Should not a logical suggestion be like this: It is time for the US to get out from the Russian borders in Baltic states and Ukraine.

I am not going to attempt elaboration on an issue or issues about which you obviously care a great deal more than I do and most likely know a lot more - even if not all unarguably correct. My comment was in part just a not-so-witty jeu d'esprit pointing to the explanatory gap if one supposed American interest in the Arab world should have something to do with rational self interest, combined with a slightly more serious imagining of what America might also seek if it were to give something to Russia. You may have noticed that I didn't mention the Crimea....

As to the Crimea which is/was part of the Ukraine I see problems with any of the simplest solutions. The Sudetenland precedent still hovers balefully and just giving in to Russia's breach of agreements and international law isn't acceptable even if you may want to find excuses for those breaches as others do for US breaches in the ME. So maybe the solution is to bribe the Ukraine - which needs the money and some cast iron guarantees about gas supplies - into proposing that the Crimea be given the chance to vote for independence (subject to various rules protecting the Ukraine and not including the possibility of becoming part of Russia).

I haven't read your links but see they refer to Nazis. While it is drawing rather a long bow to equate the Nazis of the 20s to 40s with whatever is called nazi today I draw your attention to a TV doco that I have just seen called "Nazis in the CIA" which is an interesting account of American use of former Nazis, not excluding SS, for Cold War purposes and, in South America especially, former Italian fascists.

I can't see a case for downplaying the importance of not losing the Cold War but I think clear thinking about current unsavoury allies and clients might be easier if one eschewed the word "Nazi". My enemies enemy is my friend is going to remain pragmatic common sense for the forseeable future except perhaps in the verbal battles of domestic politics.

While 9/11 was done by Al Qaeda and not a 'false flag' per se, there is a greater truth that the US leadership and Al Qaeda have always shared the same goal of spreading global chaos; Al Qaeda was essentially created by the USA in Afghanistan, backed by US allies Pakistan & Saudi Arabia, and they remain natural allies, as we see with the US attempts to ally with Al-Nusra against the Syrian government. Al Qaeda attacks on the West have been consistently used to further US goals of destroying secular Arab governments while leaving Saudi Arabia well alone. I remember the many years when the US under Bush II determinedly refused to do a single thing against Al Qaeda in Pakistan, denying they were there at all! To the extent there is a true Axis of Evil, it runs USA-Saudi-Pakistan-Al Qaeda-Daesh - with honorary roles for Turkey, and to an extent Israel too. Those nations who oppose the Axis, flawed and imperfect as they are, stand for Civilisation against Barbarism.

“While 9/11 was done by Al Qaeda and not a ‘false flag’ per se … ”

Wake up.

The US government did 9/11. The laughably absurd USG conspiracy theory is physically impossible.

Be sure to see their list of thousands of architects, engineers, and other skilled professionals who are unwilling to accept the impossible.

Yet the US govt. cannot change laws of physics, the government’s bizarre conspiracy theory is impossible.

And it’s an established scientific fact that military grade nano-thermite was used in the 9/11 attack.
Military grade nano-thermite was found at the WTC by the USGS & Niels Harrit of Univ. of Copenhagen, and 8 more scientists.

While I am well aware of occasional failures by the most prestigious scientific and medical journals to avoid publishing rubbish it is certainly comforting to know that "Nature" for example, or "Science" has given its stamp of approval to a scientific idea by (peer reviewed) publication. So.... can you cite peer reviewed support in any one of the top 30 scientific journals for your "truther" allegations at #14?

Unz’s commentary on Russia’s involvement in Syria was in a valley and is now heading downhill.

the AngloZionists had turned their attention elsewhere: the US and Israeli “deep states” jointly planned and executed the 9/11 false flag operation which gave them the perfect excuse to declare a “global war on terror”

a Nazi regime (the Ukraine)

Putin’s secret weapon: the truth

While there are some grains of truth in these statements, their excessively forceful articulation and total lack of nuance reduce them to absurdities. While Unz makes valid points, rightly decries hypocrisy and correctly defends Russia, this sort of thing makes the most superficial Kremlin propaganda that is only intended to preach to the converted / convert total morons — such as pretending MH17 wasn’t shot down by the separatists — look intelligent.

Intolerance of ambiguity reveals an authoritarian turn of mind, Adorno said. Dumb people think in terms of binaries rather than spectrums, he could equally have said. Putin can say some reasonable things and at other times come out with barefaced lies. The regime in Ukraine can have both far-right support and genuine democrats who want the rule of law and clean governance championed by the West, rather than the patron-client cronyism, chronic corruption and us-vs-them rhetoric that is the common currency of Russia. And… 9/11 was an inside job? Hitchens: Such remarks should be underlined, rather than pandered to. Or blockquoted, he could equally have said.

Sorry to inform you, but your absolute certainty about the causes of MH17 tragedy put you in the company of people that you tried so forcefully to denounce: https://consortiumnews.com/2015/08/17/propaganda-intelligence-and-mh-17/

What special access to the US-collected satellite data on the day of the MH tragedy has provided you with the certainty? http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/07/obama-should-release-mh-17-intel.html

… the US and Israeli “deep states” jointly planned and executed the 9/11 false flag operation

Quite a provocative statement. Any evidence to back it up?

… the Iraqi Army (wisely) chose to disband itself…

I thought it was Paul Bremmer, as CEO of the Coalition Provisional Authority, who (unwisely) made the decision to disband the Iraqi Army.

In other words, when a country sinks into chaos and violence this is not a US victory, but most definitely a US loss.

It may not be a US victory, but you failed to consider what impact it had on the other half of your so-called AngloZionist Empire. According to two documents (PNAC’s Clean Break and Oded Yinon’s A Strategy for Israel in the 1980s), the atomization of these Muslim countries is just what the doctor ordered for the Zionist project.

Given the foregoing, I decided to discontinue reading beyond that point. Hence, no further comments.

Unz's commentary on Russia's involvement in Syria was in a valley and is now heading downhill.

the AngloZionists had turned their attention elsewhere: the US and Israeli “deep states” jointly planned and executed the 9/11 false flag operation which gave them the perfect excuse to declare a “global war on terror”

a Nazi regime (the Ukraine)

Putin’s secret weapon: the truth

While there are some grains of truth in these statements, their excessively forceful articulation and total lack of nuance reduce them to absurdities. While Unz makes valid points, rightly decries hypocrisy and correctly defends Russia, this sort of thing makes the most superficial Kremlin propaganda that is only intended to preach to the converted / convert total morons -- such as pretending MH17 wasn't shot down by the separatists -- look intelligent.

Intolerance of ambiguity reveals an authoritarian turn of mind, Adorno said. Dumb people think in terms of binaries rather than spectrums, he could equally have said. Putin can say some reasonable things and at other times come out with barefaced lies. The regime in Ukraine can have both far-right support and genuine democrats who want the rule of law and clean governance championed by the West, rather than the patron-client cronyism, chronic corruption and us-vs-them rhetoric that is the common currency of Russia. And... 9/11 was an inside job? Hitchens: Such remarks should be underlined, rather than pandered to. Or blockquoted, he could equally have said.

Now that Russia looks better aligned with Western interests than NATO member Turkey is likely to be in the forseeable future why doesn't the US wash its hands of the ME and hand over to Russia as long as Russia stops supporting East Ukrainian rebels and a few other little matters are dealt with?

{ Now that Russia looks better aligned with Western interests than NATO member Turkey}

Russia is not better aligned with Western interests.
Russian and “Western”/Neocon interests are diametrically opposed.
Russia threw a monkey wrench in the “Western” * interests, so Neocons have been forced to pay lip service of allegedly cooperating with Russia, to buy time and figure out what to do.
Just before Russia appeared out of nowhere and disrupted Neocons’ final push to oust President Assad, the criminals were planning something big.
Go read all the memes being spread about Turkey establishing so-called safe-zones on the ground in Syria (meaning, Turkish SOP of theft of Syrian lands with NATO backing), and establishing no-fly zones.
Russia detected that NATO was going to go ahead and establish no-fly zones over Syrian airspace – an illegal, criminal act – and moved first and with lightening speed.
ISIS throat-cutter sponsoring Neocon filth got the shock of their lives.

As to Ukraine: East Ukraine is the cradle of Russia, as in Kievan Rus.
Not only should Russia not stop providing whatever little help she is providing to the freedom fighters of Novorossiya, but I expect once Syria is safe an secure from ISIS, Russia will force the issue about East Ukraine.

And all the other little matters are none of Neocons’ business: Neocons have lied and broken their promises to Gorbachev and Russia since the breakup of USSR.
Neocons are attempting to establish NATO bases right on the border of Russia.
Nothing is a little matter anymore with these criminal Neocons.
Russia has been pushed far enough.
The cruise missile salvo from the Caspian Sea was a message to the Neocons that things have changed: Russia is going to push back and in ways that will shock the Neocons meddlers.

{The United States and Saudi Arabia agreed to increase support to Syria's moderate opposition while seeking a political resolution of the four-year conflict, the U.S. State Department said after Secretary of State John Kerry met King Salman on Saturday.}

Translation: Shocked by the pounding their terrorists have been getting from Russian Air Force, US and Wahhabist terror-nest Saudi Arabia are going to increase support to ISIS throat-cutters in Syria, in an attempt to prevent their complete rout.

That sure looks like "Now that Russia looks better aligned with Western interests", donnit ?

Unz's commentary on Russia's involvement in Syria was in a valley and is now heading downhill.

the AngloZionists had turned their attention elsewhere: the US and Israeli “deep states” jointly planned and executed the 9/11 false flag operation which gave them the perfect excuse to declare a “global war on terror”

a Nazi regime (the Ukraine)

Putin’s secret weapon: the truth

While there are some grains of truth in these statements, their excessively forceful articulation and total lack of nuance reduce them to absurdities. While Unz makes valid points, rightly decries hypocrisy and correctly defends Russia, this sort of thing makes the most superficial Kremlin propaganda that is only intended to preach to the converted / convert total morons -- such as pretending MH17 wasn't shot down by the separatists -- look intelligent.

Intolerance of ambiguity reveals an authoritarian turn of mind, Adorno said. Dumb people think in terms of binaries rather than spectrums, he could equally have said. Putin can say some reasonable things and at other times come out with barefaced lies. The regime in Ukraine can have both far-right support and genuine democrats who want the rule of law and clean governance championed by the West, rather than the patron-client cronyism, chronic corruption and us-vs-them rhetoric that is the common currency of Russia. And... 9/11 was an inside job? Hitchens: Such remarks should be underlined, rather than pandered to. Or blockquoted, he could equally have said.

You seem to have been out in the midday sun too long, and mad dogs conduct more solid discourse.

If you were ever to contribute something indicative of mental focus and stamina extending beyond a 5 second emission of wind you could have picked up his mistaken reference to "Unz" - which he repeated.

{ Now that Russia looks better aligned with Western interests than NATO member Turkey}

Russia is not better aligned with Western interests.Russian and "Western"/Neocon interests are diametrically opposed. Russia threw a monkey wrench in the “Western” * interests, so Neocons have been forced to pay lip service of allegedly cooperating with Russia, to buy time and figure out what to do.Just before Russia appeared out of nowhere and disrupted Neocons’ final push to oust President Assad, the criminals were planning something big. Go read all the memes being spread about Turkey establishing so-called safe-zones on the ground in Syria (meaning, Turkish SOP of theft of Syrian lands with NATO backing), and establishing no-fly zones. Russia detected that NATO was going to go ahead and establish no-fly zones over Syrian airspace – an illegal, criminal act – and moved first and with lightening speed.ISIS throat-cutter sponsoring Neocon filth got the shock of their lives.

As to Ukraine: East Ukraine is the cradle of Russia, as in Kievan Rus. Not only should Russia not stop providing whatever little help she is providing to the freedom fighters of Novorossiya, but I expect once Syria is safe an secure from ISIS, Russia will force the issue about East Ukraine.

And all the other little matters are none of Neocons’ business: Neocons have lied and broken their promises to Gorbachev and Russia since the breakup of USSR. Neocons are attempting to establish NATO bases right on the border of Russia.Nothing is a little matter anymore with these criminal Neocons. Russia has been pushed far enough. The cruise missile salvo from the Caspian Sea was a message to the Neocons that things have changed: Russia is going to push back and in ways that will shock the Neocons meddlers.

{The United States and Saudi Arabia agreed to increase support to Syria’s moderate opposition while seeking a political resolution of the four-year conflict, the U.S. State Department said after Secretary of State John Kerry met King Salman on Saturday.}

Translation: Shocked by the pounding their terrorists have been getting from Russian Air Force, US and Wahhabist terror-nest Saudi Arabia are going to increase support to ISIS throat-cutters in Syria, in an attempt to prevent their complete rout.

That sure looks like “Now that Russia looks better aligned with Western interests”, donnit ?

One rhetorical false equation of neocon with Western interests is ... well a bit of rhetoric or poetic license for polemical purposes.... But repeated at #20 it begins to make you look a bit dim. *I* didn't equate Western interests with what the neocons advocate or seek.

Englishman Abroad. You need to acquaint yourself with geopolitics. The British Empire considered Russia its greatest enemy(great game and all that). It was the Maritime Empire(Britain) versus the Heartland Empire(Russia). It was only when Britain’s friend Japan deafeated Russia in 1905 that the British decided Russia could be co-opted as an ally and turned against Germany. This was what really led to WW I and the destruction of the Tsarist regime. The Russian minister Pyotr Durnovo realised what the British were doing and tried to warn the Tsar but it was too late .

America is the successor empire of Britain. Little has changed- the maritime empire(America) confronts the Heartland empire(Russia)

this site unz is supposed to be a " Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media."

OK, fine. Yes, SOME of the articles here do indeed fit that description. But really this site has only two types of articles, for the most part: 1) articles that deal with immigration and political correctness and how the liberals like them and are hypocrites about those two areas, and 2) middle east foreign affairs.

What about all the other stuff? And why are there so many articles about middle eastern foreign policy stuff here? I almost guarantee you that most of these articles are written by authors who get paid to write those sorts of articles.

Here are some interesting areas that almost NEVER get written about: why is there this huge political apartheid in american politics? What I am talking about is how the liberal political tribe is not allowed to say anything at all negative about affirmative action and mass immigration. And how the conservative political tribe is not allowed to say anything good about social security or medicare or nationalized healthcare.

It is a certifiable FACT that the vast majority of americans like social security and medicare and would NEVER want to have them abolished. The GOP politicians will not vote against them. Carson just said something about abolishing medicare, and I guarantee you his candidacy will end as soon as people actually start voting because of what he said. But no one in the media will admit it.

But there is hardly ever anything in the media about this rigidly enforced ideological apartheid. Why is no one talking about this? And hardly anyone ever reads or comments on this middle eastern policy articles here on this site. But every day there are more of them. Same thing for the media when it comes to foreign policy news. Hardly anyone really cares about it, but the media keeps cramming it down our throats.

As far as I am concerned there are no sites anywhere that really get into the really interesting issues.

And I have to wonder why.

The elites intentionally promote these taboos within their respective domains as forms of controlled opposition.

Obviously any sensible nation will put the interests of its citizens over non-citizens. It will also reward ambition, creativity, hard-work and effeciency without letting people less endowed with these qualities to live in misery.

This is, broadly speaking, national socialism or a reasonable facsimile thereof.

The nation that most closely attained this ideal also sought to exterminate the people most opposed to this ideal. This nation was utterly vanquished after a massive war and then fully conquered and colonized. Three generations later, that nation is still run by elites openly hostile to its folk’s interests and who tqke their marching orders from the same individuals that run the US.

The elites know they can’t promote a party that gets everything wrong, so instead they promote two seperate parties that each get some things right and other things wrong. Then they pit these groups against each other, encouraging one group to label the other as “socialists” and “communists” and the other group to label its rivals as “racists”, “misogynists”, etc.

Unz's commentary on Russia's involvement in Syria was in a valley and is now heading downhill.

the AngloZionists had turned their attention elsewhere: the US and Israeli “deep states” jointly planned and executed the 9/11 false flag operation which gave them the perfect excuse to declare a “global war on terror”

a Nazi regime (the Ukraine)

Putin’s secret weapon: the truth

While there are some grains of truth in these statements, their excessively forceful articulation and total lack of nuance reduce them to absurdities. While Unz makes valid points, rightly decries hypocrisy and correctly defends Russia, this sort of thing makes the most superficial Kremlin propaganda that is only intended to preach to the converted / convert total morons -- such as pretending MH17 wasn't shot down by the separatists -- look intelligent.

Intolerance of ambiguity reveals an authoritarian turn of mind, Adorno said. Dumb people think in terms of binaries rather than spectrums, he could equally have said. Putin can say some reasonable things and at other times come out with barefaced lies. The regime in Ukraine can have both far-right support and genuine democrats who want the rule of law and clean governance championed by the West, rather than the patron-client cronyism, chronic corruption and us-vs-them rhetoric that is the common currency of Russia. And... 9/11 was an inside job? Hitchens: Such remarks should be underlined, rather than pandered to. Or blockquoted, he could equally have said.

@James Ennis: I don't dispute any of that. I don't have a horse in this race; I only support intellectual honesty and clarity of thought. I despise nationalism, be it British or Russian. Let us right-thinking folks come together to further the cause of transhumanism!

@geokat23: I have no time for Adorno or Marxism, but I like this particular idea, regardless of who has articulated it, and believe it can be usefully culled from its source, hence my rephrasing.

{ Now that Russia looks better aligned with Western interests than NATO member Turkey}

Russia is not better aligned with Western interests.Russian and "Western"/Neocon interests are diametrically opposed. Russia threw a monkey wrench in the “Western” * interests, so Neocons have been forced to pay lip service of allegedly cooperating with Russia, to buy time and figure out what to do.Just before Russia appeared out of nowhere and disrupted Neocons’ final push to oust President Assad, the criminals were planning something big. Go read all the memes being spread about Turkey establishing so-called safe-zones on the ground in Syria (meaning, Turkish SOP of theft of Syrian lands with NATO backing), and establishing no-fly zones. Russia detected that NATO was going to go ahead and establish no-fly zones over Syrian airspace – an illegal, criminal act – and moved first and with lightening speed.ISIS throat-cutter sponsoring Neocon filth got the shock of their lives.

As to Ukraine: East Ukraine is the cradle of Russia, as in Kievan Rus. Not only should Russia not stop providing whatever little help she is providing to the freedom fighters of Novorossiya, but I expect once Syria is safe an secure from ISIS, Russia will force the issue about East Ukraine.

And all the other little matters are none of Neocons’ business: Neocons have lied and broken their promises to Gorbachev and Russia since the breakup of USSR. Neocons are attempting to establish NATO bases right on the border of Russia.Nothing is a little matter anymore with these criminal Neocons. Russia has been pushed far enough. The cruise missile salvo from the Caspian Sea was a message to the Neocons that things have changed: Russia is going to push back and in ways that will shock the Neocons meddlers.

this site unz is supposed to be a " Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media."

OK, fine. Yes, SOME of the articles here do indeed fit that description. But really this site has only two types of articles, for the most part: 1) articles that deal with immigration and political correctness and how the liberals like them and are hypocrites about those two areas, and 2) middle east foreign affairs.

What about all the other stuff? And why are there so many articles about middle eastern foreign policy stuff here? I almost guarantee you that most of these articles are written by authors who get paid to write those sorts of articles.

Here are some interesting areas that almost NEVER get written about: why is there this huge political apartheid in american politics? What I am talking about is how the liberal political tribe is not allowed to say anything at all negative about affirmative action and mass immigration. And how the conservative political tribe is not allowed to say anything good about social security or medicare or nationalized healthcare.

It is a certifiable FACT that the vast majority of americans like social security and medicare and would NEVER want to have them abolished. The GOP politicians will not vote against them. Carson just said something about abolishing medicare, and I guarantee you his candidacy will end as soon as people actually start voting because of what he said. But no one in the media will admit it.

But there is hardly ever anything in the media about this rigidly enforced ideological apartheid. Why is no one talking about this? And hardly anyone ever reads or comments on this middle eastern policy articles here on this site. But every day there are more of them. Same thing for the media when it comes to foreign policy news. Hardly anyone really cares about it, but the media keeps cramming it down our throats.

As far as I am concerned there are no sites anywhere that really get into the really interesting issues.

And I have to wonder why.

{As far as I am concerned there are no sites anywhere that really get into the really interesting issues.}

There is the golden opportunity for you to start such a site and get into really interesting issues.
Nobody forces anyone to either read or comment @UNZ.com
Ron Unz is paying for the upkeep of the site, so he and his team decide what issues to cover and which authors to invite to cover those issues.

Why do your comments always look to me like blabbering of a small child? Why don't you find it in yourself to leave the adults to comment here about the situation?

US and Israel created this mess for a good reason, why would they leave it now to Russia? That is so non-sensical? Even if the US may officially pretend that it does not care about the total failure of its Syria regime-change effort, it will be fighting tooth-and-nail to, at least, keep Iraq in its grip. The latest news is that the US has done more sorties over Iraq in the last couple of days than in the preceding months. This is just in the hope to keep Russia out of Iraq, because it has been invited in already.

Poor ISIS, from a US secret field force, they are turning into everybody's favorite punching bag (just ironic, those crazy Salafi mofos deserve much worse). In my view, now everything depends on Iran as the main counter-field-force to the crazy Salafis of the US. If Iran manages to make a big difference in the battlefield, then the opposing Syrian Sunni groups will rush to the negotiating table before they lose this last chance to get at least something for their protracted rebellion against Assad. They must be totally exhausted and truly disappointed at their US and Saudi backers.

“Why do ….look to me….?”

Because you are an immature narcissist with no idea of what it takes to persuade people (gratuitous rudeness being one marker of that trait) . I presume that you are not a retired person but that the evident time on your hands to emit flatulent pontifications to the blogosphere comes from your being unemployed and unemployable – at least in any position or occupation which conforms to your ego’s requirements.

Perhaps your greater problem for present purposes is that, while you claim working knowledge of several languages, you lack mastery of English. That perhaps explains why you combine rudeness with a long boring statement of the obvious or plausible as a supposed answer to my brief remark intended to point to the big explanatory gap needing to be filled when one considers why the hell the US should rationally be bothering with the Arabs at all in an era of efficient fracking and the coming electric vehicle. To say, by way of addition to the existing fifty thousand words (no exaggeration if one adds up UR comments), that it is all about the malign interests of the Zionists/neocons doesn’t add much value.

Hellooo. What is that the generates the electrical energy used in 'electric' vehicles?

Oil & coal.

The massive taxpayer subsidies for inefficient, vastly expensive windmills & solar arrays supply but a very small percentage of the US energy.

And there are the 1,000,000 birds killed each year by windmills in the US alone, of which many are endangered species, ignored by the neo-Marxist "greens".'Environmentalists'? Hardly.

a must read here:'Scared Witless: Prophets and profits of climate doom'http://www.principia-scientific.org/scared-witless-prophets-and-profits-of-climate-doom.htmlexcerpt:" The Climate Crisis & Renewable Energy Industry has become a $1.5-trillion-a-year business! That’s equal to the annual economic activity generated by the entire US nonprofit sector, or all savings over the past ten years from consumers switching to generic drugs. By comparison, annual revenues for much-vilified Koch Industries are about $115 billion, for ExxonMobil around $365 billion."

The fiction that the US hasn’t won a war since WW2 appears to have been accepted as fact, it’s not true. In Korea, North Korea invaded South Korea and was repelled, that is a victory. In the Vietnam War the US military won every battle and kept the South Vietnamese government in power until the US military withdrew. That is not a defeat, the North was attempting to overthrow the South and as long as the US remained engaged, the South remained a nation. Grenada and Panama can be dismissed, but they are still successful campaigns. As for the first Gulf War, Saddam’s forces were forced to withdraw from Kuwait and were seriously damaged, that’s a win. In Afghanistan, the government was overthrown and a satellite government set up by the US, another win. In the second Gulf War, the Iraqi government was destroyed, the military destroyed and another American puppet government installed, how is this not a victory? There may be guerrilla movements within the defeated nations, but until these movements gain power, they haven’t defeated anyone, let alone the US.

Good points but it wouldn't be wrong to make a more nuanced claim about US military ventures that not only criticised the war aims and the degree to which they had been achieved but also cast doubt on the competence of intelligence services, planners and the operational military. I say this as one who noted in 1991 that the Russians must have got a sobering message from the swift efficient way Desert Storm was conducted and who has heard an Australian general speak very highly of American staff work in Iraq and of the outstanding quality of the Rangers.

Thanks for the laugh.
The US military are, of course such a useless bunch of tools that on half a trillion dollars a year, thet couldn't defend their own headquarters against $12 worth of box-cutters.
What a bunch of tossers you are.

"...as long as Russia stops supporting East Ukrainian rebels..."
Could you elaborate on why the Russian Federation should cease any support (already minimal) to an enclave on the RF border, which is not only mostly inhabited by ethnic Russians but which is also fighting for a democratic process of federalization in the context of the US-sponsored illegal regime that is laced with neo-Nazi elements? Should not a logical suggestion be like this: It is time for the US to get out from the Russian borders in Baltic states and Ukraine.
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/06/12/u-s-house-admits-nazi-role-in-ukraine/
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/07/04/is-the-u-s-training-neo-nazis-in-ukraine.html
http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/neo-nazis-receive-medals-kiev-after-being-condemned-us-congress/ri8009

I am not going to attempt elaboration on an issue or issues about which you obviously care a great deal more than I do and most likely know a lot more – even if not all unarguably correct. My comment was in part just a not-so-witty jeu d’esprit pointing to the explanatory gap if one supposed American interest in the Arab world should have something to do with rational self interest, combined with a slightly more serious imagining of what America might also seek if it were to give something to Russia. You may have noticed that I didn’t mention the Crimea….

As to the Crimea which is/was part of the Ukraine I see problems with any of the simplest solutions. The Sudetenland precedent still hovers balefully and just giving in to Russia’s breach of agreements and international law isn’t acceptable even if you may want to find excuses for those breaches as others do for US breaches in the ME. So maybe the solution is to bribe the Ukraine – which needs the money and some cast iron guarantees about gas supplies – into proposing that the Crimea be given the chance to vote for independence (subject to various rules protecting the Ukraine and not including the possibility of becoming part of Russia).

The persecuted Germans in the Sudetenland overwhelmingly insisted on being part of Germany.
Get your facts straight. Chamberlain was correct and just in making the deal with Germany. Ignore your Zionist approved 'history'.

"....that the Crimea be given the chance to vote for independence (subject to various rules protecting the Ukraine and not including the possibility of becoming part of Russia)."

They did vote. Overwhelmingly in favor of reuniting with Russia. Russia was right and moral in accepting that vote of the people. The Crimea is not going back to Ukraine under any circumstances, just won't happen.

This wouldn't be the same Adorno who was a leading member of the Frankfurt School of critical theory and wrote The Authoritarian Personality in 1950, would it?

Here’s how one observer characterized the book’s goal:

[it] was to eliminate antisemitism by “subjecting the American people to what amounted to collective psychotherapy — by treating them as inmates of an insane asylum.”

: I found that momentarily amusing!

@James Ennis: I don’t dispute any of that. I don’t have a horse in this race; I only support intellectual honesty and clarity of thought. I despise nationalism, be it British or Russian. Let us right-thinking folks come together to further the cause of transhumanism!

@geokat23: I have no time for Adorno or Marxism, but I like this particular idea, regardless of who has articulated it, and believe it can be usefully culled from its source, hence my rephrasing.

I have no time for Adorno or Marxism, but I like this particular idea, regardless of who has articulated it, and believe it can be usefully culled from its source, hence my rephrasing.

Wasn't it also Adorno who was so appalled at Californians who wore shoes that did not tie that he hied himself back to Germany as soon as he was assured he could live there in comfort -- and, presumably, acquire shoestrings.

Theodor Adorno. unambiguously authoritarian down to his shoestrings.

Gertrude Stein, on the other hand, remained in Europe throughout both periods of the unpleasantness. She even made herself useful to the victims of war as she performed ambulance duties.
Stein put a less authoritarian twist on Adorno's dictum: She said, "A genius is someone who can contemplate two opposing ideas and still maintain his sanity." (It's claimed that Fitzgerald wrote the thought, but he heard it from Gertrude.)

"...as long as Russia stops supporting East Ukrainian rebels..."
Could you elaborate on why the Russian Federation should cease any support (already minimal) to an enclave on the RF border, which is not only mostly inhabited by ethnic Russians but which is also fighting for a democratic process of federalization in the context of the US-sponsored illegal regime that is laced with neo-Nazi elements? Should not a logical suggestion be like this: It is time for the US to get out from the Russian borders in Baltic states and Ukraine.
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/06/12/u-s-house-admits-nazi-role-in-ukraine/
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/07/04/is-the-u-s-training-neo-nazis-in-ukraine.html
http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/neo-nazis-receive-medals-kiev-after-being-condemned-us-congress/ri8009

I haven’t read your links but see they refer to Nazis. While it is drawing rather a long bow to equate the Nazis of the 20s to 40s with whatever is called nazi today I draw your attention to a TV doco that I have just seen called “Nazis in the CIA” which is an interesting account of American use of former Nazis, not excluding SS, for Cold War purposes and, in South America especially, former Italian fascists.

I can’t see a case for downplaying the importance of not losing the Cold War but I think clear thinking about current unsavoury allies and clients might be easier if one eschewed the word “Nazi”. My enemies enemy is my friend is going to remain pragmatic common sense for the forseeable future except perhaps in the verbal battles of domestic politics.

Because you are an immature narcissist with no idea of what it takes to persuade people (gratuitous rudeness being one marker of that trait) . I presume that you are not a retired person but that the evident time on your hands to emit flatulent pontifications to the blogosphere comes from your being unemployed and unemployable - at least in any position or occupation which conforms to your ego's requirements.

Perhaps your greater problem for present purposes is that, while you claim working knowledge of several languages, you lack mastery of English. That perhaps explains why you combine rudeness with a long boring statement of the obvious or plausible as a supposed answer to my brief remark intended to point to the big explanatory gap needing to be filled when one considers why the hell the US should rationally be bothering with the Arabs at all in an era of efficient fracking and the coming electric vehicle. To say, by way of addition to the existing fifty thousand words (no exaggeration if one adds up UR comments), that it is all about the malign interests of the Zionists/neocons doesn't add much value.

” the coming electric vehicle” ??

Hellooo. What is that the generates the electrical energy used in ‘electric’ vehicles?

Oil & coal.

The massive taxpayer subsidies for inefficient, vastly expensive windmills & solar arrays supply but a very small percentage of the US energy.

And there are the 1,000,000 birds killed each year by windmills in the US alone, of which many are endangered species, ignored by the neo-Marxist “greens”.
‘Environmentalists’? Hardly.

a must read here:
‘Scared Witless: Prophets and profits of climate doom’

excerpt:
” The Climate Crisis & Renewable Energy Industry has become a $1.5-trillion-a-year business! That’s equal to the annual economic activity generated by the entire US nonprofit sector, or all savings over the past ten years from consumers switching to generic drugs. By comparison, annual revenues for much-vilified Koch Industries are about $115 billion, for ExxonMobil around $365 billion.”

My word, you do have a keen eye. What a well picked nit. I feel complimented that you read so far and so attentively.

Indeed electric vehicles were not my trump suit and it was only yesterday that I argued with a warmist scientist (medical actually - nothing relevant to climate) that Australia ought to be selling and otherwise cashing in on its vast deposits of coal while it can. However.....

Let me quibble. I am an expert. I sunk a large amount of money into the Australian subsidiary or affiliate of Shai Agassi's Better Place premised on the need to get over the problem of limited range and many hours to recharge batteries. His idea was to have battery changeing stations and I understand it has taken off viably in Israel and Denmark. In Australia I had an interesting experience driving a totally quiet electric vehicle and did my dough.

Nonetheless I can answer your nit picking with a bigger one. As part of the pitch to investors (with more money and PC than sense?) it was guaranteed that all the battery charging would be from renewable sources - no doubt in a notional sense because they would sign up with a supplier for part of its mandatory quota of renewables. Actually it makes sense while the scale of the business allows because it is precisely battery storage which is offering the prospect of wind and solar being economically viable. I include wind just to be oecumenical. I am no enthusiast for wind power. Solar I think has a much better future.

The US government did 9/11. The laughably absurd USG conspiracy theory is physically impossible.

http://www.ae911truth.org

Be sure to see their list of thousands of architects, engineers, and other skilled professionals who are unwilling to accept the impossible.

Yet the US govt. cannot change laws of physics, the government's bizarre conspiracy theory is impossible.

And it's an established scientific fact that military grade nano-thermite was used in the 9/11 attack.
Military grade nano-thermite was found at the WTC by the USGS & Niels Harrit of Univ. of Copenhagen, and 8 more scientists.
http://www.ae911truth.org

'Muslims in caves' cannot make military grade nano-thermite.

What Science Says About the Destruction of World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2, and 7
http://www.beyondmisinformation.org/#beyond-misinformation

While I am well aware of occasional failures by the most prestigious scientific and medical journals to avoid publishing rubbish it is certainly comforting to know that “Nature” for example, or “Science” has given its stamp of approval to a scientific idea by (peer reviewed) publication. So…. can you cite peer reviewed support in any one of the top 30 scientific journals for your “truther” allegations at #14?

You seem to have been out in the midday sun too long, and mad dogs conduct more solid discourse.

If you were ever to contribute something indicative of mental focus and stamina extending beyond a 5 second emission of wind you could have picked up his mistaken reference to “Unz” – which he repeated.

Forgotten already that you were pretending to have filtered out all my comments? Unable to understand what you read, because your mind is occupied by some irrelevance? Senility is not treating you kindly.

Unz's commentary on Russia's involvement in Syria was in a valley and is now heading downhill.

the AngloZionists had turned their attention elsewhere: the US and Israeli “deep states” jointly planned and executed the 9/11 false flag operation which gave them the perfect excuse to declare a “global war on terror”

a Nazi regime (the Ukraine)

Putin’s secret weapon: the truth

While there are some grains of truth in these statements, their excessively forceful articulation and total lack of nuance reduce them to absurdities. While Unz makes valid points, rightly decries hypocrisy and correctly defends Russia, this sort of thing makes the most superficial Kremlin propaganda that is only intended to preach to the converted / convert total morons -- such as pretending MH17 wasn't shot down by the separatists -- look intelligent.

Intolerance of ambiguity reveals an authoritarian turn of mind, Adorno said. Dumb people think in terms of binaries rather than spectrums, he could equally have said. Putin can say some reasonable things and at other times come out with barefaced lies. The regime in Ukraine can have both far-right support and genuine democrats who want the rule of law and clean governance championed by the West, rather than the patron-client cronyism, chronic corruption and us-vs-them rhetoric that is the common currency of Russia. And... 9/11 was an inside job? Hitchens: Such remarks should be underlined, rather than pandered to. Or blockquoted, he could equally have said.

I am not going to attempt elaboration on an issue or issues about which you obviously care a great deal more than I do and most likely know a lot more - even if not all unarguably correct. My comment was in part just a not-so-witty jeu d'esprit pointing to the explanatory gap if one supposed American interest in the Arab world should have something to do with rational self interest, combined with a slightly more serious imagining of what America might also seek if it were to give something to Russia. You may have noticed that I didn't mention the Crimea....

As to the Crimea which is/was part of the Ukraine I see problems with any of the simplest solutions. The Sudetenland precedent still hovers balefully and just giving in to Russia's breach of agreements and international law isn't acceptable even if you may want to find excuses for those breaches as others do for US breaches in the ME. So maybe the solution is to bribe the Ukraine - which needs the money and some cast iron guarantees about gas supplies - into proposing that the Crimea be given the chance to vote for independence (subject to various rules protecting the Ukraine and not including the possibility of becoming part of Russia).

“The Sudetenland precedent still hovers balefully …”

Nonsense.

The persecuted Germans in the Sudetenland overwhelmingly insisted on being part of Germany.
Get your facts straight. Chamberlain was correct and just in making the deal with Germany. Ignore your Zionist approved ‘history’.

“….that the Crimea be given the chance to vote for independence (subject to various rules protecting the Ukraine and not including the possibility of becoming part of Russia).”

They did vote. Overwhelmingly in favor of reuniting with Russia. Russia was right and moral in accepting that vote of the people. The Crimea is not going back to Ukraine under any circumstances, just won’t happen.

Wally you should get used to paying close attention to what people say - and be careful about overliteral interpretations.

Recall that I was talking about a bargaining situation. That demands consideration of what each party might take the opportunity to try and get out of it, how the issues are perceived and will be portrayed, and what taboos and shibboleths have to be observed, inter alia. Hanging over any such negotiation is nearly 80 years of people screaming "appeasement". That is why, symbolically, Sudetenland is hanging over many later negotiations.

As to the Crimean vote that you refer to that merely shows what, given the choices they were given, those who voted and had their votes counted voted for. No doubt the majority of people in the Crimea would prefer as of 2015 to be citizens of Russia than of the Ukraine.

So what?

The objective of the negotiations should be to achieve genuine rather than coerced agreement which gets round the fact that Russia's breach of law and treaty is being accepted in the sense of the results not being reversed. The theoretical position would be that the parties were all negotiating on a level playing field from a position which assumed no change from the 2013 situation.

We don't want "unequal treaties" do we? Imagine if Hong Kong's future was being negotiated now instead of in 1984! Mightn't the new strong China be saying that those 19th century unequal treaties were all to be disregarded and only strength on the ground today to be allowed to count?

Thank you for providing the clear and strong answer to the strangely intellectually-uneven post of WoO. Some of his responses seem as feigning ignorance and some are rather provocative, as if bordering on dishonesty.

{The United States and Saudi Arabia agreed to increase support to Syria's moderate opposition while seeking a political resolution of the four-year conflict, the U.S. State Department said after Secretary of State John Kerry met King Salman on Saturday.}

Translation: Shocked by the pounding their terrorists have been getting from Russian Air Force, US and Wahhabist terror-nest Saudi Arabia are going to increase support to ISIS throat-cutters in Syria, in an attempt to prevent their complete rout.

That sure looks like "Now that Russia looks better aligned with Western interests", donnit ?

One rhetorical false equation of neocon with Western interests is … well a bit of rhetoric or poetic license for polemical purposes…. But repeated at #20 it begins to make you look a bit dim. *I* didn’t equate Western interests with what the neocons advocate or seek.

The fiction that the US hasn't won a war since WW2 appears to have been accepted as fact, it's not true. In Korea, North Korea invaded South Korea and was repelled, that is a victory. In the Vietnam War the US military won every battle and kept the South Vietnamese government in power until the US military withdrew. That is not a defeat, the North was attempting to overthrow the South and as long as the US remained engaged, the South remained a nation. Grenada and Panama can be dismissed, but they are still successful campaigns. As for the first Gulf War, Saddam's forces were forced to withdraw from Kuwait and were seriously damaged, that's a win. In Afghanistan, the government was overthrown and a satellite government set up by the US, another win. In the second Gulf War, the Iraqi government was destroyed, the military destroyed and another American puppet government installed, how is this not a victory? There may be guerrilla movements within the defeated nations, but until these movements gain power, they haven't defeated anyone, let alone the US.

Good points but it wouldn’t be wrong to make a more nuanced claim about US military ventures that not only criticised the war aims and the degree to which they had been achieved but also cast doubt on the competence of intelligence services, planners and the operational military. I say this as one who noted in 1991 that the Russians must have got a sobering message from the swift efficient way Desert Storm was conducted and who has heard an Australian general speak very highly of American staff work in Iraq and of the outstanding quality of the Rangers.

Hellooo. What is that the generates the electrical energy used in 'electric' vehicles?

Oil & coal.

The massive taxpayer subsidies for inefficient, vastly expensive windmills & solar arrays supply but a very small percentage of the US energy.

And there are the 1,000,000 birds killed each year by windmills in the US alone, of which many are endangered species, ignored by the neo-Marxist "greens".'Environmentalists'? Hardly.

a must read here:'Scared Witless: Prophets and profits of climate doom'http://www.principia-scientific.org/scared-witless-prophets-and-profits-of-climate-doom.htmlexcerpt:" The Climate Crisis & Renewable Energy Industry has become a $1.5-trillion-a-year business! That’s equal to the annual economic activity generated by the entire US nonprofit sector, or all savings over the past ten years from consumers switching to generic drugs. By comparison, annual revenues for much-vilified Koch Industries are about $115 billion, for ExxonMobil around $365 billion."

My word, you do have a keen eye. What a well picked nit. I feel complimented that you read so far and so attentively.

Indeed electric vehicles were not my trump suit and it was only yesterday that I argued with a warmist scientist (medical actually – nothing relevant to climate) that Australia ought to be selling and otherwise cashing in on its vast deposits of coal while it can. However…..

Let me quibble. I am an expert. I sunk a large amount of money into the Australian subsidiary or affiliate of Shai Agassi’s Better Place premised on the need to get over the problem of limited range and many hours to recharge batteries. His idea was to have battery changeing stations and I understand it has taken off viably in Israel and Denmark. In Australia I had an interesting experience driving a totally quiet electric vehicle and did my dough.

Nonetheless I can answer your nit picking with a bigger one. As part of the pitch to investors (with more money and PC than sense?) it was guaranteed that all the battery charging would be from renewable sources – no doubt in a notional sense because they would sign up with a supplier for part of its mandatory quota of renewables. Actually it makes sense while the scale of the business allows because it is precisely battery storage which is offering the prospect of wind and solar being economically viable. I include wind just to be oecumenical. I am no enthusiast for wind power. Solar I think has a much better future.

My understanding is that battery storage options are not yet mature. The best option seems to be flow cells containing organics that mimic chlorophyll redox reactions. They appear, in recent research, to be superior to vanadium flow cells. Do you have access to viable battery storage technology that you would like to share with us?

Unfortunately, I do not share your optimism as the world is running out of time for the magic technical solutions:
http://ourfiniteworld.com/2015/08/26/deflationary-collapse-ahead/

As for your other comment that the LPR/DNR shot down MH-17. Please provide your analysis and citations and add to the critical knowledge base... You will note that the poorly written Dutch report did not lay blame to anyone!

As I explained to your over a month ago, the LPR/DNR forces had trapped several brigades of the Ukrainian military and the downing of MH-17 created a situation whereby several thousand Ukrainians were able to escape the trap. Furthermore, it is impossible to shoot down a plane without the support radar units only present in the BUK batteries of the Ukrainian army.

the US and Israeli “deep states” jointly planned and executed the 9/11 false flag operation

9-11 was America’s version of the Reichstag fire incident which provided the pretense to launch wars of aggression, curtail the rights of citizens, loot the public treasury, institute reigns of terror in occupied areas with it’s policy of torturing anyone it sees fit, and so on. However, to me it looks like a US-Saudi Arabian operation. Saudi Arabia provided the bulk of the true believer dupes who went on their one-way missions and they probably received their training over there and here. Senator Bob Graham has been lobbying for release of the redacted 28 pages of the 9-11 report and has hinted that SA funded them. Some of the hijackers were in contact with SA officials whilst in the US. Looking at the available information I don’t see any evidence of the direct involvement of Israel. Perhaps they got wind of something brewing and were following the suspects, that’s a possibility, and it’s also probable that the event worked in their favor. The Saudi connection is one that’s reaped many billions of dollars in contracts, arms purchases, cooperation and coordination in many areas such as in Syria but yet hasn’t received much publicity at all.

Nice try. The problem with your feeble attempt to absolve your coreligionists of blame is that the world now knows who the prime beneficiary is of all those wars of aggression to which you referred. AAMOF, two distinguished professors documented these facts in their book, The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy.

One more time
The Official Version of 9/11 goes something like this...

Directed by a beardy-guy from a cave in Afghanistan, ( This well appointed Suite http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/nether_fictoid3.htm according to the London Times): nineteen hard-drinking, coke-snorting, devout Muslims enjoy lap dances before their mission to meet Allah...

Using nothing more than craft knifes, they overpower cabin crew, passengers and pilots on four planes...

And hangover or not, they manage to give the world's most sophisticated air defense system the slip...

Unfazed by leaving their “How to Fly a Passenger Jet” guide in the car at the airport, they master the controls in no-time and score direct hits on two towers, causing THREE to collapse completely...

Our masterminds even manage to overpower the odd law of physics or two... and the world watches in awe as steel-framed buildings fall symmetrically - through their own mass - at free-fall speed, for the first time in history.

Despite all their dastardly cunning, they stupidly give their identity away by using explosion-proof passports, which survive the fireball undamaged and fall to the ground... only to be discovered by the incredible crime-fighting sleuths at the FBI...

…Meanwhile down in Washington...

Hani Hanjour, having previously flunked 2-man Cessna flying school, gets carried away with all the success of the day and suddenly finds incredible abilities behind the controls of a Boeing...

Instead of flying straight down into the large roof area of the Pentagon, he decides to show off a little...

Executing an incredible 270 degree downward spiral, he levels off to hit the low facade of the world's most heavily defended building...

...all without a single shot being fired.... or ruining the nicely mowed lawn... and all at a speed just too fast to capture on video...

...Later, in the skies above Pennsylvania...

So desperate to talk to loved ones before their death, some passengers use sheer willpower to connect mobile calls that otherwise would not be possible until several years later...

And following a heroic attempt by some to retake control of Flight 93, it crashes into a Shankesville field leaving no trace of engines, fuselage or occupants... except for the standard issue Muslim terrorists bandana...

...Further south in Florida...

President Bush, our brave Commander-in-Chief continues to read “My Pet Goat” to a class full of primary school children... shrugging off the obvious possibility that his life could be in imminent danger...

...In New York...

World Trade Center leaseholder Larry Silverstein blesses his own foresight in insuring the buildings against terrorist attack only six weeks previously...

While back in Washington, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz shake their heads in disbelief at their own luck in getting the 'New Pearl Harbor' catalyzing event they so desired to pursue their agenda of world domination...

And finally, not to be disturbed too much by reports of their own deaths, at least seven of our nineteen suicide hijackers turn up alive and kicking in mainstream media reports...

If you were ever to contribute something indicative of mental focus and stamina extending beyond a 5 second emission of wind you could have picked up his mistaken reference to "Unz" - which he repeated.

Forgotten already that you were pretending to have filtered out all my comments? Unable to understand what you read, because your mind is occupied by some irrelevance? Senility is not treating you kindly.

As I have previously noted your lack of mental stamina I shall keep this short. Your not understanding how the filtering system works perhaps excuses you your "pretending" mistake.

But what I should really offer is an apology. I don't take mental illness lightly and I am sorry for you. First you refer to someone as effectually less sound than a mad dog. Now it is senility. A bit like the repressed homosexual who is hard on queers. Your brevity too, though I am far from wanting to encourage you to write long essays, is a marker of your mental difficulties.

If again, for the usual technical reasons, I come across your comments I shall try to behave with sympathetic restraint.

The persecuted Germans in the Sudetenland overwhelmingly insisted on being part of Germany.
Get your facts straight. Chamberlain was correct and just in making the deal with Germany. Ignore your Zionist approved 'history'.

"....that the Crimea be given the chance to vote for independence (subject to various rules protecting the Ukraine and not including the possibility of becoming part of Russia)."

They did vote. Overwhelmingly in favor of reuniting with Russia. Russia was right and moral in accepting that vote of the people. The Crimea is not going back to Ukraine under any circumstances, just won't happen.

Wally you should get used to paying close attention to what people say – and be careful about overliteral interpretations.

Recall that I was talking about a bargaining situation. That demands consideration of what each party might take the opportunity to try and get out of it, how the issues are perceived and will be portrayed, and what taboos and shibboleths have to be observed, inter alia. Hanging over any such negotiation is nearly 80 years of people screaming “appeasement”. That is why, symbolically, Sudetenland is hanging over many later negotiations.

As to the Crimean vote that you refer to that merely shows what, given the choices they were given, those who voted and had their votes counted voted for. No doubt the majority of people in the Crimea would prefer as of 2015 to be citizens of Russia than of the Ukraine.

So what?

The objective of the negotiations should be to achieve genuine rather than coerced agreement which gets round the fact that Russia’s breach of law and treaty is being accepted in the sense of the results not being reversed. The theoretical position would be that the parties were all negotiating on a level playing field from a position which assumed no change from the 2013 situation.

We don’t want “unequal treaties” do we? Imagine if Hong Kong’s future was being negotiated now instead of in 1984! Mightn’t the new strong China be saying that those 19th century unequal treaties were all to be disregarded and only strength on the ground today to be allowed to count?

The persecuted Germans in the Sudetenland overwhelmingly insisted on being part of Germany.
Get your facts straight. Chamberlain was correct and just in making the deal with Germany. Ignore your Zionist approved 'history'.

"....that the Crimea be given the chance to vote for independence (subject to various rules protecting the Ukraine and not including the possibility of becoming part of Russia)."

They did vote. Overwhelmingly in favor of reuniting with Russia. Russia was right and moral in accepting that vote of the people. The Crimea is not going back to Ukraine under any circumstances, just won't happen.

Thank you for providing the clear and strong answer to the strangely intellectually-uneven post of WoO. Some of his responses seem as feigning ignorance and some are rather provocative, as if bordering on dishonesty.

The character Wizard of Oz is best ignored. He deserves the title of the Most Prolific Troll on unz.com. I have never read one sensible thing from the character, just babbles and senseless statements. In this way, he is an unusual amateur troll, because professional trolls are highly trained and focused individuals, this is just an online rambler. Perhaps his style of trolling is the dilution and dragging down of the level of intelligent discussion.

I tend to ignore him, but just happened to come across his first post to this article how US and Russian interests in Syria/ME now align. Even someone dropped from another planet (onto his head) would not write something as stupid as that. Zero contribution to discussion, just filling up the electronic space with own random synapse discharges (synaptic noise).

You obviously haven't taken on board my response to Wally which observes the rules of logical discourse. I doubt that you would be able to judge that or you would not have congratulated him on his rather sloppy reply. You should have been able to see what I pointed out without help.

I would be interested to know on what you base your claim to be a judge of whether something is "intellectually uneven". You obviously don't have a demanding or important job but maybe have some other proof of intellectual standing commensurate with your occasional pretensions.

Your suggestion of possible dishonesty points to a misunderstanding. Why would anyone be dishonest who doesn't care about the issue enough to have a line to push, or indeed at all in my case?

Sure I don't want America to go on weakening itself and losing even soft power as appears to be its current course but that's about it and nothing I say or do is going to make the slightest difference. Same for Europe's multiple problems.

However, while I am using the UR as one of my prompts to thinking about the wider world which hardly impinges on me at all and to what I should rationally think about contending views and interests I find it difficult to resist responding to what presents itself as paranoid rubbish (up to one or two responses), delusion, lazy or discourteous illogic and sloppiness of expression or content - and, generally lack of clarity (benign often enough) or plain bad arguments.

The fiction that the US hasn't won a war since WW2 appears to have been accepted as fact, it's not true. In Korea, North Korea invaded South Korea and was repelled, that is a victory. In the Vietnam War the US military won every battle and kept the South Vietnamese government in power until the US military withdrew. That is not a defeat, the North was attempting to overthrow the South and as long as the US remained engaged, the South remained a nation. Grenada and Panama can be dismissed, but they are still successful campaigns. As for the first Gulf War, Saddam's forces were forced to withdraw from Kuwait and were seriously damaged, that's a win. In Afghanistan, the government was overthrown and a satellite government set up by the US, another win. In the second Gulf War, the Iraqi government was destroyed, the military destroyed and another American puppet government installed, how is this not a victory? There may be guerrilla movements within the defeated nations, but until these movements gain power, they haven't defeated anyone, let alone the US.

If Putin wants to waste valuable Russian resources and blood propping up a wildly unpopular tyrant like Asaad that’s his business.

If Assad is so "wildly unpopular" then who is doing all the fighting in defense of the state? Seems as if they'd have folded up by now if that were true. Instead they've battered the different groups even before the Russians directly intervened.

Meanwhile, he’s pissing off hundreds of millions of Arabs and Muslims throughout the world – not to mention millions of Muslims within Russia’s borders.

Your concern for Putin's standing with Muslims is very touching. Of course the US also has a few image problems amongst the world's Muslims. Presumably you're an American so therefore you'd like to see the US do something to raise the way it's regarded by Muslims, perhaps by becoming a champion of their causes?

Can you then imagine the wrath of the Muslims against the Zionist ? Can you imagine how long it will endure? 1917,1919,1947,1948,1956 1967,1982,1996,2003-2015 and the names like Yoded Yinon, PNAC FDD,AEI,ECI,David Project,Israeli Project, Iraq,Iran,Syria,Lebanon Liberation Act, Pamela Geller on NY transit, Wiesenthal Center , neoconservatives. Liberal Interventionists , and lining up Mufti against Hitler, and many more will stay with thir collective consciousness.

BTW. It was not so much the tortures of Jesus Christ that contributed to the angst of the Christian against the Jews ,as were the memory of the lies,tortures,distortions,and use of Roman power against the nascent Christianity ,subsequent corruption of the feudal elites by the Jews moneylenders ,and promoting wars between nations .
It needed a flag an anthem,a color code ,a story in one line to rally the masses against the oppressive Jewish elite . It achieved that in the phrase- Christ Killer. It is time to unpack it . The hatred was not religious . It was about survival .

Behind all the religious invectives of the Muslim against the Jewish, also lie same developmental process . It is not about religion .
It is the history. This also wil be reset .

Putin doesn't have to worry . There has been millions men march against Bush war in Europe Asia ,Africa and even in US and Canada.
Have you seen one yet in London or Cairo or Jakarta?

THE war in Ukraine, for all its many other consequences, will cause Russia’s fertility rate to rise further. If that sounds strange consider that wars historically cause population growth. The biggest increase in the European population came about because of the Second World War. Chechnya’s population grew from 800,000 to 1.2 million because of the conflict there. In New York the number of weddings increased by 25% in the immediate aftermath of the attack on the World Trade Centre on 9/11. Four years later that increase had been lost in full.

Hydra paradox: When culling animals makes them thrive: GARDENERS. who apply insecticide do not expect pest populations to flourish. Nor do fishery regulators anticipate that more fishing will boost the size of their stocks. Perhaps they should. Thanks to the complexity of the natural world, killing individuals doesn’t always end up diminishing their population. The failure to consider this possibility could be confounding resource management and pest eradication, and perhaps even attempts to boost numbers of threatened species. A decade ago, my collaborator Hiroyuki Matsuda and I coined the term hydra effect to describe all situations where a higher death rate in a particular species ultimately increases the size of its population.

the US and Israeli “deep states” jointly planned and executed the 9/11 false flag operation

9-11 was America's version of the Reichstag fire incident which provided the pretense to launch wars of aggression, curtail the rights of citizens, loot the public treasury, institute reigns of terror in occupied areas with it's policy of torturing anyone it sees fit, and so on. However, to me it looks like a US-Saudi Arabian operation. Saudi Arabia provided the bulk of the true believer dupes who went on their one-way missions and they probably received their training over there and here. Senator Bob Graham has been lobbying for release of the redacted 28 pages of the 9-11 report and has hinted that SA funded them. Some of the hijackers were in contact with SA officials whilst in the US. Looking at the available information I don't see any evidence of the direct involvement of Israel. Perhaps they got wind of something brewing and were following the suspects, that's a possibility, and it's also probable that the event worked in their favor. The Saudi connection is one that's reaped many billions of dollars in contracts, arms purchases, cooperation and coordination in many areas such as in Syria but yet hasn't received much publicity at all.

…which provided the pretense (sic) to launch wars of aggression

Nice try. The problem with your feeble attempt to absolve your coreligionists of blame is that the world now knows who the prime beneficiary is of all those wars of aggression to which you referred. AAMOF, two distinguished professors documented these facts in their book, The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy.

I quite agree with your astute summary of what has transpired, but why does the U.S. wish to destroy secular Arab governments? Is it an Israeli strategic preference, believing the replacement medieval jihad scum are more manageable due to their inherent incompetence, or is it romantic stupidity: Bush believing in the religion of peace and that the desire for freedom is written on every human heart, Barry Hussain Soetero remembering fondly his boyhood years in an Indonesian madrasa? It's utter folly and ignorance, either way.

why does the U.S. wish to destroy secular Arab governments? Is it an Israeli strategic preference, believing the replacement medieval jihad scum are more manageable due to their inherent incompetence

The US is getting closer to become national security state because of Putin he does not have the aim of changing the West into a much more tough-minded opponent but he may do that in an external- conventional sense, while his enabling Assad to keep going against the mass of the Syrian population (which had far worn out his forces and Hezbollah by sheer attrition) is prolonging a war he cannot possibly win while the population is overwhelmingly Sunni (including Kurds).

By propping up Assad’d doomed rump state mass murder machine Russia is creating a refugee wedge being used by the governing elites to to displace indigenous European population. All the national security state surveillance and laws supposedly guarding against terrorist ISIS will be deployed against indigenous nationalism. The huge internal legal-security apparatus is already being primed against the indigenous majority popular organisation. So what we will end up with will be anti nationalist security states throughout the West, which will be turned into a single giant Panopticon

Thee Panopticon is a type of institutional building designed by the English philosopher and social theorist Jeremy Bentham in the late 18th century. The concept of the design is to allow all (pan-) inmates of an institution to be observed (-opticon) by a single watchman without the inmates being able to tell whether or not they are being watched. Although it is physically impossible for the single watchman to observe all cells at once, the fact that the inmates cannot know when they are being watched means that all inmates must act as though they are watched at all times, effectively controlling their own behaviour constantly.

"The US is getting closer to become national security state because of Putin he does not have the aim of changing the West into a much more tough-minded opponent but he may do that in an external- conventional sense, while his enabling Assad to keep going against the mass of the Syrian population (which had far worn out his forces and Hezbollah by sheer attrition) is prolonging a war he cannot possibly win while the population is overwhelmingly Sunni (including Kurds)."

Could you explain in shorter sentences what exactly the many words above do mean?
For now it is sounds as an expression of a panicking and hysterical mind. Is it the obvious change of game, which has messed up the neocons' (Israel-firsters') plans that has upset your so much? Since when the Israelis become alarmed by transformation of the US into a national security state? The police training, systematizing the torture techniques and surveillance methods and such have been bringing nice gesheft to the state of Israel and Israelis.

Thank you for providing the clear and strong answer to the strangely intellectually-uneven post of WoO. Some of his responses seem as feigning ignorance and some are rather provocative, as if bordering on dishonesty.

The character Wizard of Oz is best ignored. He deserves the title of the Most Prolific Troll on unz.com. I have never read one sensible thing from the character, just babbles and senseless statements. In this way, he is an unusual amateur troll, because professional trolls are highly trained and focused individuals, this is just an online rambler. Perhaps his style of trolling is the dilution and dragging down of the level of intelligent discussion.

I tend to ignore him, but just happened to come across his first post to this article how US and Russian interests in Syria/ME now align. Even someone dropped from another planet (onto his head) would not write something as stupid as that. Zero contribution to discussion, just filling up the electronic space with own random synapse discharges (synaptic noise).

As I noted it is a serious problem to conduct strictly logical discourse with someone whose use of language is not up to professional standard, at least in English. (I'm reminded of the old joke about the head of language instruction at the Foreign Office of whom it was said that he could speak 15 languages fluently but not say anything intelligent in any of them).

Despite my best efforts I still can't get through the simple idea that suggesting that US and Russian interests might coincide in Syria - albeit far from necessarily true - is not at all like saying that their perceived interests at influential and official levels are the same. Is it really beyond you to develop the apparent paradox and see a picture of Russia stepping in and America getting out to the advantage of both (especially America unless you are a neocon or Israel Firster in your view of American interests). A pity about the Arab spring having turned to winter and left the Syrians to the mercy of an Iranian backed Alawite government - but even so that with Russia also there to protect some minorities might be better than what the US set out to achieve.

The flurry of claims in the west that Russia's position had changed and they were telling Assad to go is, to the perceptive, itself a sign that on the contrary, Russian support for the Syrian state is stronger than ever. The shamelessness of the western lie machine has few parallels in history.

“The shamelessness of the western lie machine has few parallels in history.”

Correction:

The shamelessness of the western Jewish lie machine has few parallels in history.

the US and Israeli “deep states” jointly planned and executed the 9/11 false flag operation

9-11 was America's version of the Reichstag fire incident which provided the pretense to launch wars of aggression, curtail the rights of citizens, loot the public treasury, institute reigns of terror in occupied areas with it's policy of torturing anyone it sees fit, and so on. However, to me it looks like a US-Saudi Arabian operation. Saudi Arabia provided the bulk of the true believer dupes who went on their one-way missions and they probably received their training over there and here. Senator Bob Graham has been lobbying for release of the redacted 28 pages of the 9-11 report and has hinted that SA funded them. Some of the hijackers were in contact with SA officials whilst in the US. Looking at the available information I don't see any evidence of the direct involvement of Israel. Perhaps they got wind of something brewing and were following the suspects, that's a possibility, and it's also probable that the event worked in their favor. The Saudi connection is one that's reaped many billions of dollars in contracts, arms purchases, cooperation and coordination in many areas such as in Syria but yet hasn't received much publicity at all.

One more time
The Official Version of 9/11 goes something like this…

Directed by a beardy-guy from a cave in Afghanistan, ( This well appointed Suite http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/nether_fictoid3.htm according to the London Times): nineteen hard-drinking, coke-snorting, devout Muslims enjoy lap dances before their mission to meet Allah…

Using nothing more than craft knifes, they overpower cabin crew, passengers and pilots on four planes…

And hangover or not, they manage to give the world’s most sophisticated air defense system the slip…

Unfazed by leaving their “How to Fly a Passenger Jet” guide in the car at the airport, they master the controls in no-time and score direct hits on two towers, causing THREE to collapse completely…

Our masterminds even manage to overpower the odd law of physics or two… and the world watches in awe as steel-framed buildings fall symmetrically – through their own mass – at free-fall speed, for the first time in history.

Despite all their dastardly cunning, they stupidly give their identity away by using explosion-proof passports, which survive the fireball undamaged and fall to the ground… only to be discovered by the incredible crime-fighting sleuths at the FBI…

…Meanwhile down in Washington…

Hani Hanjour, having previously flunked 2-man Cessna flying school, gets carried away with all the success of the day and suddenly finds incredible abilities behind the controls of a Boeing…

Instead of flying straight down into the large roof area of the Pentagon, he decides to show off a little…

Executing an incredible 270 degree downward spiral, he levels off to hit the low facade of the world’s most heavily defended building…

…all without a single shot being fired…. or ruining the nicely mowed lawn… and all at a speed just too fast to capture on video…

…Later, in the skies above Pennsylvania…

So desperate to talk to loved ones before their death, some passengers use sheer willpower to connect mobile calls that otherwise would not be possible until several years later…

And following a heroic attempt by some to retake control of Flight 93, it crashes into a Shankesville field leaving no trace of engines, fuselage or occupants… except for the standard issue Muslim terrorists bandana…

…Further south in Florida…

President Bush, our brave Commander-in-Chief continues to read “My Pet Goat” to a class full of primary school children… shrugging off the obvious possibility that his life could be in imminent danger…

…In New York…

World Trade Center leaseholder Larry Silverstein blesses his own foresight in insuring the buildings against terrorist attack only six weeks previously…

While back in Washington, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz shake their heads in disbelief at their own luck in getting the ‘New Pearl Harbor’ catalyzing event they so desired to pursue their agenda of world domination…

And finally, not to be disturbed too much by reports of their own deaths, at least seven of our nineteen suicide hijackers turn up alive and kicking in mainstream media reports…

Forgotten already that you were pretending to have filtered out all my comments? Unable to understand what you read, because your mind is occupied by some irrelevance? Senility is not treating you kindly.

As I have previously noted your lack of mental stamina I shall keep this short. Your not understanding how the filtering system works perhaps excuses you your “pretending” mistake.

But what I should really offer is an apology. I don’t take mental illness lightly and I am sorry for you. First you refer to someone as effectually less sound than a mad dog. Now it is senility. A bit like the repressed homosexual who is hard on queers. Your brevity too, though I am far from wanting to encourage you to write long essays, is a marker of your mental difficulties.

If again, for the usual technical reasons, I come across your comments I shall try to behave with sympathetic restraint.

Thank you for providing the clear and strong answer to the strangely intellectually-uneven post of WoO. Some of his responses seem as feigning ignorance and some are rather provocative, as if bordering on dishonesty.

You obviously haven’t taken on board my response to Wally which observes the rules of logical discourse. I doubt that you would be able to judge that or you would not have congratulated him on his rather sloppy reply. You should have been able to see what I pointed out without help.

I would be interested to know on what you base your claim to be a judge of whether something is “intellectually uneven”. You obviously don’t have a demanding or important job but maybe have some other proof of intellectual standing commensurate with your occasional pretensions.

It sure would be nice if these articles had a half page summary at the end . Reciting History books and installing endless supporting links is all well and good, perhaps even necessary but time is a precious thing and this would help a lot. One paragraph comments would be great as well.
This article could be summed up in two words “not much”.

If Putin wants to waste valuable Russian resources and blood propping up a wildly unpopular tyrant like Asaad that's his business.

Meanwhile, he's pissing off hundreds of millions of Arabs and Muslims throughout the world - not to mention millions of Muslims within Russia's borders.

Even in a best case scenario Assad will only cling to power. The fighting won't end anytime soon and Russia will inevitably get dragged deeper and deeper into the Syrian mess.

If Putin wants to waste valuable Russian resources and blood propping up a wildly unpopular tyrant like Asaad that’s his business.

If Assad is so “wildly unpopular” then who is doing all the fighting in defense of the state? Seems as if they’d have folded up by now if that were true. Instead they’ve battered the different groups even before the Russians directly intervened.

Meanwhile, he’s pissing off hundreds of millions of Arabs and Muslims throughout the world – not to mention millions of Muslims within Russia’s borders.

Your concern for Putin’s standing with Muslims is very touching. Of course the US also has a few image problems amongst the world’s Muslims. Presumably you’re an American so therefore you’d like to see the US do something to raise the way it’s regarded by Muslims, perhaps by becoming a champion of their causes?

The US is getting closer to become national security state because of Putin he does not have the aim of changing the West into a much more tough-minded opponent but he may do that in an external- conventional sense, while his enabling Assad to keep going against the mass of the Syrian population (which had far worn out his forces and Hezbollah by sheer attrition) is prolonging a war he cannot possibly win while the population is overwhelmingly Sunni (including Kurds).

By propping up Assad'd doomed rump state mass murder machine Russia is creating a refugee wedge being used by the governing elites to to displace indigenous European population. All the national security state surveillance and laws supposedly guarding against terrorist ISIS will be deployed against indigenous nationalism. The huge internal legal-security apparatus is already being primed against the indigenous majority popular organisation. So what we will end up with will be anti nationalist security states throughout the West, which will be turned into a single giant Panopticon

Thee Panopticon is a type of institutional building designed by the English philosopher and social theorist Jeremy Bentham in the late 18th century. The concept of the design is to allow all (pan-) inmates of an institution to be observed (-opticon) by a single watchman without the inmates being able to tell whether or not they are being watched. Although it is physically impossible for the single watchman to observe all cells at once, the fact that the inmates cannot know when they are being watched means that all inmates must act as though they are watched at all times, effectively controlling their own behaviour constantly.

“The US is getting closer to become national security state because of Putin he does not have the aim of changing the West into a much more tough-minded opponent but he may do that in an external- conventional sense, while his enabling Assad to keep going against the mass of the Syrian population (which had far worn out his forces and Hezbollah by sheer attrition) is prolonging a war he cannot possibly win while the population is overwhelmingly Sunni (including Kurds).”

Could you explain in shorter sentences what exactly the many words above do mean?
For now it is sounds as an expression of a panicking and hysterical mind. Is it the obvious change of game, which has messed up the neocons’ (Israel-firsters’) plans that has upset your so much? Since when the Israelis become alarmed by transformation of the US into a national security state? The police training, systematizing the torture techniques and surveillance methods and such have been bringing nice gesheft to the state of Israel and Israelis.

"the Russians can't do it alone". Which, in today's world can really mean watch the nation that is unmentioned in this article ..... China. Maybe not in terms of a direct military intervention. Of the pair that US lack of diplomacy is pushing together, Russia seems more suited for that role. But, if this all works out like The Saker suggests, then China coming in to help rebuild the country, its buildings and infrastructure and even to some extent its institutions, might end up being critical assistence in the longer terms. So, just remember to keep an eye on China. At this time, they certainly won't oppose Russia, and if there are ways to help Russia without spending a lot of money or resources, then they would probably feel inclined. And to expand Chinese influence into a new part of the world would be in their interests as well. If Chinese aid and workers were noticeably helping to rebuilt Syria, then they would accomplish just that and not have to spend a huge fortune to do so, nor fight in a war.

One would think that China would join in the fracas in Syria to send a subtle message to the more radical Uyghurs.

Well, it would be in character, would it not. It's the old, "Let's you and him fight" ploy. Of course, utilized in a context where the "him" was largely erected either directly or indirectly through the efforts of our Islamist and Zionist Big Fuckin' Friends, and then further aided by the US's grossly ineffective efforts to nibble the resulting "him" to death by ducks (thanks USAF!), with scarcely any effort at all expended. [I have heard a figure advanced that up to 80% of US strike sorties returned with their ordonance still hanging from those hard points. Hmm. Yeah, team.]

Now it's CYA time, vaulting the propaganda about how really very, very serious US efforts to undermine the headchoppers are, and always have been (but particularly now in the harsh glare of public scrutiny with the marked contrast that the US's efforts -prior and current - clearly present to the deadly serious warfighting of the Russians and their allies against the headchoppers ).

Yes, jump in front of the parade as if the parade was always and ever your idea, rather than its polar opposite, namely the use of these takfiri killers as a cat's paw to advance Zionist and NeoCon (but I repeat myself) ends.

Wally you should get used to paying close attention to what people say - and be careful about overliteral interpretations.

Recall that I was talking about a bargaining situation. That demands consideration of what each party might take the opportunity to try and get out of it, how the issues are perceived and will be portrayed, and what taboos and shibboleths have to be observed, inter alia. Hanging over any such negotiation is nearly 80 years of people screaming "appeasement". That is why, symbolically, Sudetenland is hanging over many later negotiations.

As to the Crimean vote that you refer to that merely shows what, given the choices they were given, those who voted and had their votes counted voted for. No doubt the majority of people in the Crimea would prefer as of 2015 to be citizens of Russia than of the Ukraine.

So what?

The objective of the negotiations should be to achieve genuine rather than coerced agreement which gets round the fact that Russia's breach of law and treaty is being accepted in the sense of the results not being reversed. The theoretical position would be that the parties were all negotiating on a level playing field from a position which assumed no change from the 2013 situation.

We don't want "unequal treaties" do we? Imagine if Hong Kong's future was being negotiated now instead of in 1984! Mightn't the new strong China be saying that those 19th century unequal treaties were all to be disregarded and only strength on the ground today to be allowed to count?

Perhaps you should start your silly arguments with the idea that the US staged a coup in Ukraine. The follow on is that a lot of people in their government, and in our government, should be in jail.

When confronted by the contribution of someone who, through incapacity or discourtesy pours out a jumble of words that at best need editing it is hard to know whether the writer (you) actually means what his words might suggest or whether "silly" is applicable to him. "Arguments" is the first problematic word of any consequence. What do you mean by it? My comment was after all primarily a response to Wally which pointed out that he had misunderstood the way I had use "Sudetenland". (For those who sensibly can't be bothered to look back at the reference I was using it as a symbol for the *concept* of appeasement as generally used and misused in political rhetoric without any implications as the the rights or interests of Sudeten Germans).

But perhaps you were rather incoherently objecting to my positing a bargaining situation where the US and its allies had to fudge the fact (or if you like their belief) that Russia was in clear breach of international law and treaty and was not going to have its gains from that conduct reversed. If so your manner of making objection was such as to be totally irrelevant to what I was saying. You seemed to be saying that the US had done something wrong which justified Russia as a matter of law in using its armed forces in the Crimea against the forces of the sovereign government of that part of the Ukraine as it then certainly was and elsewhere in eastern Ukraine. But surely you can't be saying something so clearly wrong....

THE war in Ukraine, for all its many other consequences, will cause Russia’s fertility rate to rise further. If that sounds strange consider that wars historically cause population growth. The biggest increase in the European population came about because of the Second World War. Chechnya’s population grew from 800,000 to 1.2 million because of the conflict there. In New York the number of weddings increased by 25% in the immediate aftermath of the attack on the World Trade Centre on 9/11. Four years later that increase had been lost in full.

Hydra paradox: When culling animals makes them thrive: GARDENERS. who apply insecticide do not expect pest populations to flourish. Nor do fishery regulators anticipate that more fishing will boost the size of their stocks. Perhaps they should. Thanks to the complexity of the natural world, killing individuals doesn’t always end up diminishing their population. The failure to consider this possibility could be confounding resource management and pest eradication, and perhaps even attempts to boost numbers of threatened species. A decade ago, my collaborator Hiroyuki Matsuda and I coined the term hydra effect to describe all situations where a higher death rate in a particular species ultimately increases the size of its population.

Interesting links but the Darwinian ratchet idea hardly seems applicable to whatever may cause a rise in Russian birthrate.

Maybe that’s because the heading was misleading in so far as it implied that the Darwinian ratchet was the cause.

And a question arising: why does the Darwininian ratchet appear not to apply to Palestinian resistance to Israel? And how did successful counter insurgencies succeed?

This is sooo much better than your previous, far too pessimistic piece, Saker. It is a better informed and well thought one that will inspire rather than discourage. Well done and keep it up!

Mikhas.

Thanks for the words of support, Mikhas, but please understand that my role is not to inspire or discourage, but simply to offer the best analysis I can. Sure, I also have personal sympathies and hopes, but I try hard to set them aside and provide an honest analysis, whether it results in a standing ovation or a deluge of hate mail
Concerning Syria, I am “very cautiously optimistic” even though I see tremendous risks and difficulties ahead.
Cheers!

Unless the Iranians and the Hezbollah can wipe off the ground of terrorists now, this could turn into a bad disaster for Russia, an endless drain on the resources.

I remember how the US marched into the war on Iraq - there were marching bands and crew cut marines marching to their beats on David Letterman Show, the audience singing patriotic songs. Setting aside how much of a pure crime this attack was, I was thinking that some of the crew cut marines (looking like good old cannon fodder) will come back in body bags a few years later. And they did.

All this means that it is much easier to get into a war then to get out. Wars always start with the patriotic and joyous marching band music and end with funeral Death Marches and crying mothers.

Let us see a Russian exit strategy, in the face of a determined scheming by the Dark Alliance. Although Russia has a noble intention of reaching for peace in Syria, this goal is not achievable by bombing the terrorists in Syria. It would be achievable only by bombing the sponsors of terrorism, the Dark Alliance. But this would quickly lead to a global nuclear war.

Therefore, there is no clear solution. But let us see if Putin can do his magic again, he is a political genius of the generation.

Perhaps you should start your silly arguments with the idea that the US staged a coup in Ukraine. The follow on is that a lot of people in their government, and in our government, should be in jail.

Then you wouldn't have anything to say.

ta

When confronted by the contribution of someone who, through incapacity or discourtesy pours out a jumble of words that at best need editing it is hard to know whether the writer (you) actually means what his words might suggest or whether “silly” is applicable to him. “Arguments” is the first problematic word of any consequence. What do you mean by it? My comment was after all primarily a response to Wally which pointed out that he had misunderstood the way I had use “Sudetenland”. (For those who sensibly can’t be bothered to look back at the reference I was using it as a symbol for the *concept* of appeasement as generally used and misused in political rhetoric without any implications as the the rights or interests of Sudeten Germans).

But perhaps you were rather incoherently objecting to my positing a bargaining situation where the US and its allies had to fudge the fact (or if you like their belief) that Russia was in clear breach of international law and treaty and was not going to have its gains from that conduct reversed. If so your manner of making objection was such as to be totally irrelevant to what I was saying. You seemed to be saying that the US had done something wrong which justified Russia as a matter of law in using its armed forces in the Crimea against the forces of the sovereign government of that part of the Ukraine as it then certainly was and elsewhere in eastern Ukraine. But surely you can’t be saying something so clearly wrong….

The character Wizard of Oz is best ignored. He deserves the title of the Most Prolific Troll on unz.com. I have never read one sensible thing from the character, just babbles and senseless statements. In this way, he is an unusual amateur troll, because professional trolls are highly trained and focused individuals, this is just an online rambler. Perhaps his style of trolling is the dilution and dragging down of the level of intelligent discussion.

I tend to ignore him, but just happened to come across his first post to this article how US and Russian interests in Syria/ME now align. Even someone dropped from another planet (onto his head) would not write something as stupid as that. Zero contribution to discussion, just filling up the electronic space with own random synapse discharges (synaptic noise).

As I noted it is a serious problem to conduct strictly logical discourse with someone whose use of language is not up to professional standard, at least in English. (I’m reminded of the old joke about the head of language instruction at the Foreign Office of whom it was said that he could speak 15 languages fluently but not say anything intelligent in any of them).

Despite my best efforts I still can’t get through the simple idea that suggesting that US and Russian interests might coincide in Syria – albeit far from necessarily true – is not at all like saying that their perceived interests at influential and official levels are the same. Is it really beyond you to develop the apparent paradox and see a picture of Russia stepping in and America getting out to the advantage of both (especially America unless you are a neocon or Israel Firster in your view of American interests). A pity about the Arab spring having turned to winter and left the Syrians to the mercy of an Iranian backed Alawite government – but even so that with Russia also there to protect some minorities might be better than what the US set out to achieve.

Thank you for providing the clear and strong answer to the strangely intellectually-uneven post of WoO. Some of his responses seem as feigning ignorance and some are rather provocative, as if bordering on dishonesty.

Your suggestion of possible dishonesty points to a misunderstanding. Why would anyone be dishonest who doesn’t care about the issue enough to have a line to push, or indeed at all in my case?

Sure I don’t want America to go on weakening itself and losing even soft power as appears to be its current course but that’s about it and nothing I say or do is going to make the slightest difference. Same for Europe’s multiple problems.

However, while I am using the UR as one of my prompts to thinking about the wider world which hardly impinges on me at all and to what I should rationally think about contending views and interests I find it difficult to resist responding to what presents itself as paranoid rubbish (up to one or two responses), delusion, lazy or discourteous illogic and sloppiness of expression or content – and, generally lack of clarity (benign often enough) or plain bad arguments.

Thanks for the words of support, Mikhas, but please understand that my role is not to inspire or discourage, but simply to offer the best analysis I can. Sure, I also have personal sympathies and hopes, but I try hard to set them aside and provide an honest analysis, whether it results in a standing ovation or a deluge of hate mail :-)
Concerning Syria, I am "very cautiously optimistic" even though I see tremendous risks and difficulties ahead.
Cheers!

Unless the Iranians and the Hezbollah can wipe off the ground of terrorists now, this could turn into a bad disaster for Russia, an endless drain on the resources.

I remember how the US marched into the war on Iraq – there were marching bands and crew cut marines marching to their beats on David Letterman Show, the audience singing patriotic songs. Setting aside how much of a pure crime this attack was, I was thinking that some of the crew cut marines (looking like good old cannon fodder) will come back in body bags a few years later. And they did.

All this means that it is much easier to get into a war then to get out. Wars always start with the patriotic and joyous marching band music and end with funeral Death Marches and crying mothers.

Let us see a Russian exit strategy, in the face of a determined scheming by the Dark Alliance. Although Russia has a noble intention of reaching for peace in Syria, this goal is not achievable by bombing the terrorists in Syria. It would be achievable only by bombing the sponsors of terrorism, the Dark Alliance. But this would quickly lead to a global nuclear war.

Therefore, there is no clear solution. But let us see if Putin can do his magic again, he is a political genius of the generation.

"But this would quickly lead to a global [sic] nuclear war". Setting aside what to me is your rather odd premise about what the Russians might, nuclear war dangers aside, think it useful to do ... have you thought this through in the sense of thinking what happens first, what precautions fail, how it spreads and so on and on? Why would India, Pakistan, North Korea, China or France - even Britain get involved?

If Putin wants to waste valuable Russian resources and blood propping up a wildly unpopular tyrant like Asaad that’s his business.

If Assad is so "wildly unpopular" then who is doing all the fighting in defense of the state? Seems as if they'd have folded up by now if that were true. Instead they've battered the different groups even before the Russians directly intervened.

Meanwhile, he’s pissing off hundreds of millions of Arabs and Muslims throughout the world – not to mention millions of Muslims within Russia’s borders.

Your concern for Putin's standing with Muslims is very touching. Of course the US also has a few image problems amongst the world's Muslims. Presumably you're an American so therefore you'd like to see the US do something to raise the way it's regarded by Muslims, perhaps by becoming a champion of their causes?

[Presumably you’re an American so therefore you’d like to see the US do something to raise the way it’s regarded by Muslims]

Ah, but there you forget about Sherm’s dual loyalty (to put it generously).

As I have previously noted your lack of mental stamina I shall keep this short. Your not understanding how the filtering system works perhaps excuses you your "pretending" mistake.

But what I should really offer is an apology. I don't take mental illness lightly and I am sorry for you. First you refer to someone as effectually less sound than a mad dog. Now it is senility. A bit like the repressed homosexual who is hard on queers. Your brevity too, though I am far from wanting to encourage you to write long essays, is a marker of your mental difficulties.

If again, for the usual technical reasons, I come across your comments I shall try to behave with sympathetic restraint.

My word, you do have a keen eye. What a well picked nit. I feel complimented that you read so far and so attentively.

Indeed electric vehicles were not my trump suit and it was only yesterday that I argued with a warmist scientist (medical actually - nothing relevant to climate) that Australia ought to be selling and otherwise cashing in on its vast deposits of coal while it can. However.....

Let me quibble. I am an expert. I sunk a large amount of money into the Australian subsidiary or affiliate of Shai Agassi's Better Place premised on the need to get over the problem of limited range and many hours to recharge batteries. His idea was to have battery changeing stations and I understand it has taken off viably in Israel and Denmark. In Australia I had an interesting experience driving a totally quiet electric vehicle and did my dough.

Nonetheless I can answer your nit picking with a bigger one. As part of the pitch to investors (with more money and PC than sense?) it was guaranteed that all the battery charging would be from renewable sources - no doubt in a notional sense because they would sign up with a supplier for part of its mandatory quota of renewables. Actually it makes sense while the scale of the business allows because it is precisely battery storage which is offering the prospect of wind and solar being economically viable. I include wind just to be oecumenical. I am no enthusiast for wind power. Solar I think has a much better future.

My understanding is that battery storage options are not yet mature. The best option seems to be flow cells containing organics that mimic chlorophyll redox reactions. They appear, in recent research, to be superior to vanadium flow cells. Do you have access to viable battery storage technology that you would like to share with us?

Unfortunately, I do not share your optimism as the world is running out of time for the magic technical solutions:

As for your other comment that the LPR/DNR shot down MH-17. Please provide your analysis and citations and add to the critical knowledge base… You will note that the poorly written Dutch report did not lay blame to anyone!

As I explained to your over a month ago, the LPR/DNR forces had trapped several brigades of the Ukrainian military and the downing of MH-17 created a situation whereby several thousand Ukrainians were able to escape the trap. Furthermore, it is impossible to shoot down a plane without the support radar units only present in the BUK batteries of the Ukrainian army.

You are probably right in suggesting that enthusiasm for economical battery storage is premature and indeed there was a persuasive article in The Australian recently which suggested that wind and solar sources of electricity would still be negligible in 2030 and even much later. However your link didn't add to or subtract from my optimism about life continuing to improve for most of the world's people as a result if ever more rapid innovation and inventiveness such as has transformed the world in 200 years. That is not an irrational hope but neither, I concede is it based more on reason than temperament. Allow me to intrude one stray observation about the linked author's worry about debt. There has been remarkably little - indeed almost nothing for perhaps obvious reasons - said since 2007 about bankruptcy as a way of getting rid of burdensome debt. It should be born in mind that Germany and Japan inter alia have shown what vitality can arise out of a monetary wipeout.

As to your reference to "your other comment that the LPR/DNR [have I got that right? You are certainly not quoting anything I said in that form] shot down MH17" I am not sure what you are referring to and am not a passionate partisan on the issue of what happened to MH17 who might prefer hunting down previous statements about it (especially by myself!!) to getting some sleep.

I was not aware of the theory that Ukrainian forces may have shot down MH17 as a way of giving an opportunity to trapped Ukrainian units to escape. I suppose that is a rational if not plausible explanation provided several facts of which I was not aware are established and provided the evidence that the missile was not one of the old ones known to be those which the Ukrainian had could be successfully contested.

Unless the Iranians and the Hezbollah can wipe off the ground of terrorists now, this could turn into a bad disaster for Russia, an endless drain on the resources.

I remember how the US marched into the war on Iraq - there were marching bands and crew cut marines marching to their beats on David Letterman Show, the audience singing patriotic songs. Setting aside how much of a pure crime this attack was, I was thinking that some of the crew cut marines (looking like good old cannon fodder) will come back in body bags a few years later. And they did.

All this means that it is much easier to get into a war then to get out. Wars always start with the patriotic and joyous marching band music and end with funeral Death Marches and crying mothers.

Let us see a Russian exit strategy, in the face of a determined scheming by the Dark Alliance. Although Russia has a noble intention of reaching for peace in Syria, this goal is not achievable by bombing the terrorists in Syria. It would be achievable only by bombing the sponsors of terrorism, the Dark Alliance. But this would quickly lead to a global nuclear war.

Therefore, there is no clear solution. But let us see if Putin can do his magic again, he is a political genius of the generation.

“But this would quickly lead to a global [sic] nuclear war”. Setting aside what to me is your rather odd premise about what the Russians might, nuclear war dangers aside, think it useful to do … have you thought this through in the sense of thinking what happens first, what precautions fail, how it spreads and so on and on? Why would India, Pakistan, North Korea, China or France – even Britain get involved?

My understanding is that battery storage options are not yet mature. The best option seems to be flow cells containing organics that mimic chlorophyll redox reactions. They appear, in recent research, to be superior to vanadium flow cells. Do you have access to viable battery storage technology that you would like to share with us?

Unfortunately, I do not share your optimism as the world is running out of time for the magic technical solutions:
http://ourfiniteworld.com/2015/08/26/deflationary-collapse-ahead/

As for your other comment that the LPR/DNR shot down MH-17. Please provide your analysis and citations and add to the critical knowledge base... You will note that the poorly written Dutch report did not lay blame to anyone!

As I explained to your over a month ago, the LPR/DNR forces had trapped several brigades of the Ukrainian military and the downing of MH-17 created a situation whereby several thousand Ukrainians were able to escape the trap. Furthermore, it is impossible to shoot down a plane without the support radar units only present in the BUK batteries of the Ukrainian army.

You are probably right in suggesting that enthusiasm for economical battery storage is premature and indeed there was a persuasive article in The Australian recently which suggested that wind and solar sources of electricity would still be negligible in 2030 and even much later. However your link didn’t add to or subtract from my optimism about life continuing to improve for most of the world’s people as a result if ever more rapid innovation and inventiveness such as has transformed the world in 200 years. That is not an irrational hope but neither, I concede is it based more on reason than temperament. Allow me to intrude one stray observation about the linked author’s worry about debt. There has been remarkably little – indeed almost nothing for perhaps obvious reasons – said since 2007 about bankruptcy as a way of getting rid of burdensome debt. It should be born in mind that Germany and Japan inter alia have shown what vitality can arise out of a monetary wipeout.

As to your reference to “your other comment that the LPR/DNR [have I got that right? You are certainly not quoting anything I said in that form] shot down MH17″ I am not sure what you are referring to and am not a passionate partisan on the issue of what happened to MH17 who might prefer hunting down previous statements about it (especially by myself!!) to getting some sleep.

I agree that solar power collectors will soon outperform coal fired electrical generation. I would still be interested in any links you have on innovative power storage technologies that would allow electrical power motor vehicle charging stations to be deployed.

There are some innovations in wind power that may improve this option too.

My understanding is that battery storage options are not yet mature. The best option seems to be flow cells containing organics that mimic chlorophyll redox reactions. They appear, in recent research, to be superior to vanadium flow cells. Do you have access to viable battery storage technology that you would like to share with us?

Unfortunately, I do not share your optimism as the world is running out of time for the magic technical solutions:
http://ourfiniteworld.com/2015/08/26/deflationary-collapse-ahead/

As for your other comment that the LPR/DNR shot down MH-17. Please provide your analysis and citations and add to the critical knowledge base... You will note that the poorly written Dutch report did not lay blame to anyone!

As I explained to your over a month ago, the LPR/DNR forces had trapped several brigades of the Ukrainian military and the downing of MH-17 created a situation whereby several thousand Ukrainians were able to escape the trap. Furthermore, it is impossible to shoot down a plane without the support radar units only present in the BUK batteries of the Ukrainian army.

I was not aware of the theory that Ukrainian forces may have shot down MH17 as a way of giving an opportunity to trapped Ukrainian units to escape. I suppose that is a rational if not plausible explanation provided several facts of which I was not aware are established and provided the evidence that the missile was not one of the old ones known to be those which the Ukrainian had could be successfully contested.

please accept my apologies about my MH17 comment. It was "Englishman Abroad" who blamed the DPR/LPR for the shooting down of MH17.

As for Europe, the EU is collapsing over the refugee and economic migrant crisis. I would expect 1.5 million new residents in Europe this year who will being their family next year leading to about 8 million to be "integrated" next year. Add in several million Ukrainian refugees following its collapse ( http://www.sovereignman.com/podcast/013-making-sense-of-ukraine-boots-on-the-ground-report-14788/) and the welfare state in Europe will not last.

I would suggest that Australia and New Zealand are better options that Europe for a safe life.

You are probably right in suggesting that enthusiasm for economical battery storage is premature and indeed there was a persuasive article in The Australian recently which suggested that wind and solar sources of electricity would still be negligible in 2030 and even much later. However your link didn't add to or subtract from my optimism about life continuing to improve for most of the world's people as a result if ever more rapid innovation and inventiveness such as has transformed the world in 200 years. That is not an irrational hope but neither, I concede is it based more on reason than temperament. Allow me to intrude one stray observation about the linked author's worry about debt. There has been remarkably little - indeed almost nothing for perhaps obvious reasons - said since 2007 about bankruptcy as a way of getting rid of burdensome debt. It should be born in mind that Germany and Japan inter alia have shown what vitality can arise out of a monetary wipeout.

As to your reference to "your other comment that the LPR/DNR [have I got that right? You are certainly not quoting anything I said in that form] shot down MH17" I am not sure what you are referring to and am not a passionate partisan on the issue of what happened to MH17 who might prefer hunting down previous statements about it (especially by myself!!) to getting some sleep.

I agree that solar power collectors will soon outperform coal fired electrical generation. I would still be interested in any links you have on innovative power storage technologies that would allow electrical power motor vehicle charging stations to be deployed.

There are some innovations in wind power that may improve this option too.

If Putin wants to waste valuable Russian resources and blood propping up a wildly unpopular tyrant like Asaad that's his business.

Meanwhile, he's pissing off hundreds of millions of Arabs and Muslims throughout the world - not to mention millions of Muslims within Russia's borders.

Even in a best case scenario Assad will only cling to power. The fighting won't end anytime soon and Russia will inevitably get dragged deeper and deeper into the Syrian mess.

Can you then imagine the wrath of the Muslims against the Zionist ? Can you imagine how long it will endure? 1917,1919,1947,1948,1956 1967,1982,1996,2003-2015 and the names like Yoded Yinon, PNAC FDD,AEI,ECI,David Project,Israeli Project, Iraq,Iran,Syria,Lebanon Liberation Act, Pamela Geller on NY transit, Wiesenthal Center , neoconservatives. Liberal Interventionists , and lining up Mufti against Hitler, and many more will stay with thir collective consciousness.

BTW. It was not so much the tortures of Jesus Christ that contributed to the angst of the Christian against the Jews ,as were the memory of the lies,tortures,distortions,and use of Roman power against the nascent Christianity ,subsequent corruption of the feudal elites by the Jews moneylenders ,and promoting wars between nations .
It needed a flag an anthem,a color code ,a story in one line to rally the masses against the oppressive Jewish elite . It achieved that in the phrase- Christ Killer. It is time to unpack it . The hatred was not religious . It was about survival .

Behind all the religious invectives of the Muslim against the Jewish, also lie same developmental process . It is not about religion .
It is the history. This also wil be reset .

Putin doesn’t have to worry . There has been millions men march against Bush war in Europe Asia ,Africa and even in US and Canada.
Have you seen one yet in London or Cairo or Jakarta?

I was not aware of the theory that Ukrainian forces may have shot down MH17 as a way of giving an opportunity to trapped Ukrainian units to escape. I suppose that is a rational if not plausible explanation provided several facts of which I was not aware are established and provided the evidence that the missile was not one of the old ones known to be those which the Ukrainian had could be successfully contested.

please accept my apologies about my MH17 comment. It was “Englishman Abroad” who blamed the DPR/LPR for the shooting down of MH17.

the US and Israeli “deep states” jointly planned and executed the 9/11 false flag operation which gave them the perfect excuse to declare a “global war on terror” which basically gave the AngloZionists a worldwide “license to kill” à la 007, except that in this case the target was not a person, but entire countries.

I like that the author takes this position as a basis for his analysis. It is hard to take people seriously if they cannot even figure out that there are severe problems with the official 9/11 story. When I see people I’d normally agree with like a Paul Krugman or a Noam Chomsky, disparage 9/11 truth, it makes me doubt pretty much everything else they have to say.

There is something afoot and we haven’t really pieced it together yet. Some animosity between the Neoliberal Washington Consensus and the former Eastern Block i.e. the BRICS nations.

I think that Assad would actually like to go. But, how can he leave his people(s) to the tender mercies of ISIS?

Why would you think Assad would actually like to go ?
Based on what evidence ?
Go where ?
Why should he go anywhere ?
Because war criminal nations US and UK demand it ? Based on what International Law ?
Because genocidal, criminal state founded by nomads (Turks) from Uyguristan wants it so as to steal more Syrian Arab land ?
No, Erdogan should go. Back to Uyguristan.
War criminals Bush, Blair, and Cheney should go – to jail.

Despite the anti-Assad propaganda, majority people of Syria prefer him over what they know will come if he is forced out.
Sunnis are about 75% of Syria’s population. Assad co-religionists, Alawites, and Christians are a minority. If Sunni officers and foot soldiers wanted him gone, he would be gone long ago.

I quite agree with your astute summary of what has transpired, but why does the U.S. wish to destroy secular Arab governments? Is it an Israeli strategic preference, believing the replacement medieval jihad scum are more manageable due to their inherent incompetence, or is it romantic stupidity: Bush believing in the religion of peace and that the desire for freedom is written on every human heart, Barry Hussain Soetero remembering fondly his boyhood years in an Indonesian madrasa? It's utter folly and ignorance, either way.

Seems to be both (although I don’t think Obama personally gives a damn either way, the only thing he actually cares about is US black-vs-white politics). Neocons seem to believe that Global Democratic Transformation – global chaos – is both good for Israel and good for the world. In the absence of a real peer competitor the US military-industrial complex likes global chaos because it helps justify big procurement budgets.
However my impression is that while Likud has a reality-based (if IMO mistaken) view that chaos is good for Israel, the American leadership class is motivated by a non-reality-based ideology that they cannot discard no matter how many times they are proved wrong. By and large they do believe that everyone should be and can be a Liberal Democrat and that Liberal Democracy must and will arise from the destruction of existing societies. There is a heavy dose of Frankfurt School Marxism mixed with Wilsonian Liberal post-Puritan idealism.

Now that Russia looks better aligned with Western interests than NATO member Turkey is likely to be in the forseeable future why doesn't the US wash its hands of the ME and hand over to Russia as long as Russia stops supporting East Ukrainian rebels and a few other little matters are dealt with?

Well, with a moniker like Wizard of Oz, perhaps it would be only appropriate to “pay no attention to the man behind the curtain”; i.e., your factually-challenged maunderings, as identified by those others who responded to them. Well, I suppose knocking them down is still the correct approach, on second thought.

I wonder if the US will claim victory if Russia, Syria, and Iran mop up Daesh.

Well, it would be in character, would it not. It’s the old, “Let’s you and him fight” ploy. Of course, utilized in a context where the “him” was largely erected either directly or indirectly through the efforts of our Islamist and Zionist Big Fuckin’ Friends, and then further aided by the US’s grossly ineffective efforts to nibble the resulting “him” to death by ducks (thanks USAF!), with scarcely any effort at all expended. [I have heard a figure advanced that up to 80% of US strike sorties returned with their ordonance still hanging from those hard points. Hmm. Yeah, team.]

Now it’s CYA time, vaulting the propaganda about how really very, very serious US efforts to undermine the headchoppers are, and always have been (but particularly now in the harsh glare of public scrutiny with the marked contrast that the US’s efforts -prior and current – clearly present to the deadly serious warfighting of the Russians and their allies against the headchoppers ).

Yes, jump in front of the parade as if the parade was always and ever your idea, rather than its polar opposite, namely the use of these takfiri killers as a cat’s paw to advance Zionist and NeoCon (but I repeat myself) ends.

After the slow offensive of the Syrian army in the North of Hama province, in the mountains of Latakia, and HOMS, finally came the battle for Aleppo, acquiring all the traits of the major battle. Here now the Syrian army, with support from aviation of the Russian Federation tries to achieve major operational success.

1. They are still unable to pass the remaining few miles to the air base surrounded in Cowarie, despite more than a serious effort being made. The infantry of the Caliphate demonstrates the high stability in defence and Assad troops literally have to chew this defense, the rate of onset more than low. In connection with deterioration of weather, number of departures was decreased and accordingly the air support is weak. However, Assad forces have come close enough to solving major operational problems, liberating Kuweires airbase is already at arm’s length. It is obvious that in the coming days the Syrian army will continue to attempt to relieve it.

2. South of Aleppo the Syrian army continues to advance confidently enough, especially since there demoralized troops of the Pro-Western rebels and al-Nusra continue to retreat unable to stop the army of Assad. In General, the task of expanding the security zone to the South and South-West of Aleppo at the moment is successfully solved. Nevertheless – to hold the front against the Caliphate in the North, to defend the city, liberate Kuweires, and to keep the road on which hangs the whole of the Aleppo group is seriously difficult to achieve decisive success while Assad’s forces are considerably scattered on several different tasks. Facilitates the situation is the fact that to the North-West of Aleppo fighting continues between the Caliphate and the units of the Syrian Free Army who are trying to restore the front after the defeat in the first half of October to the North of Aleppo.

3. Regarding the battle for the road on which hangs the Aleppo group, as mentioned earlier, no boiler there. The Caliphate and al-Nusra have abandoned some posts (casualties of the Syrian army amounted to a few dozen people + 20-25 units of various wheeled and tracked vehicles) to the South of the city of Hanser and cut the track. With the approach spanned parts of the Syrian army, militants pushed back into the wilderness. Nevertheless, the challenge remains – the retention of the road at sections where there is no continuous front line requires being there enough significant forces that are now needed in the area of Aleppo. However, to keep track need. For Caliphate this operation is obviously an important tactical victory. To turn it into operational success with the surrounded by the troops of Assad in the Aleppo district of Caliphate and al-Nusra there simply aren’t enough forces. Therefore, the maximum possible is raiding operations on army positions.

4. VSK bombing map of Russia on 24 October. It is well visible, where most of the fighting and require the application of additional effort on the part of VKS RF. The de facto situation requires an increase in the intensity of air strikes in the main areas, especially the infrastructure of the Caliphate. It should be noted that in the Russian defense enterprises switched to persistent release of bombs and missiles – the enterprise works in 3 shifts. There is a growing need in the corrected aerial bombs and missiles air-to-ground.

5. In Deraa, Jobar, HOMS, daise-oz-Zor and Latakia in the mountains without significant changes. Attack of the Kurds has not yet begun.

I don't know about Cassad's coverage of Syria. (I speak as a loyal reader of his DNR/LNR pieces). It seems he accepts too uncritically the idea of a "Free Syrian Army" independent of Jabhat al-Nusra and the other IS-lite outfits, the claim that the IS-lites are significantly different from IS, and the US assertions that they are in some significant sense fighting IS.

After the slow offensive of the Syrian army in the North of Hama province, in the mountains of Latakia, and HOMS, finally came the battle for Aleppo, acquiring all the traits of the major battle. Here now the Syrian army, with support from aviation of the Russian Federation tries to achieve major operational success.

1. They are still unable to pass the remaining few miles to the air base surrounded in Cowarie, despite more than a serious effort being made. The infantry of the Caliphate demonstrates the high stability in defence and Assad troops literally have to chew this defense, the rate of onset more than low. In connection with deterioration of weather, number of departures was decreased and accordingly the air support is weak. However, Assad forces have come close enough to solving major operational problems, liberating Kuweires airbase is already at arm’s length. It is obvious that in the coming days the Syrian army will continue to attempt to relieve it.

2. South of Aleppo the Syrian army continues to advance confidently enough, especially since there demoralized troops of the Pro-Western rebels and al-Nusra continue to retreat unable to stop the army of Assad. In General, the task of expanding the security zone to the South and South-West of Aleppo at the moment is successfully solved. Nevertheless – to hold the front against the Caliphate in the North, to defend the city, liberate Kuweires, and to keep the road on which hangs the whole of the Aleppo group is seriously difficult to achieve decisive success while Assad’s forces are considerably scattered on several different tasks. Facilitates the situation is the fact that to the North-West of Aleppo fighting continues between the Caliphate and the units of the Syrian Free Army who are trying to restore the front after the defeat in the first half of October to the North of Aleppo.

3. Regarding the battle for the road on which hangs the Aleppo group, as mentioned earlier, no boiler there. The Caliphate and al-Nusra have abandoned some posts (casualties of the Syrian army amounted to a few dozen people + 20-25 units of various wheeled and tracked vehicles) to the South of the city of Hanser and cut the track. With the approach spanned parts of the Syrian army, militants pushed back into the wilderness. Nevertheless, the challenge remains – the retention of the road at sections where there is no continuous front line requires being there enough significant forces that are now needed in the area of Aleppo. However, to keep track need. For Caliphate this operation is obviously an important tactical victory. To turn it into operational success with the surrounded by the troops of Assad in the Aleppo district of Caliphate and al-Nusra there simply aren’t enough forces. Therefore, the maximum possible is raiding operations on army positions.

4. VSK bombing map of Russia on 24 October. It is well visible, where most of the fighting and require the application of additional effort on the part of VKS RF. The de facto situation requires an increase in the intensity of air strikes in the main areas, especially the infrastructure of the Caliphate. It should be noted that in the Russian defense enterprises switched to persistent release of bombs and missiles – the enterprise works in 3 shifts. There is a growing need in the corrected aerial bombs and missiles air-to-ground.

5. In Deraa, Jobar, HOMS, daise-oz-Zor and Latakia in the mountains without significant changes. Attack of the Kurds has not yet begun.

In Russian: http://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/

In English: https://4threvolutionarywar.wordpress.com/tag/col-cassad/

I don’t know about Cassad’s coverage of Syria. (I speak as a loyal reader of his DNR/LNR pieces). It seems he accepts too uncritically the idea of a “Free Syrian Army” independent of Jabhat al-Nusra and the other IS-lite outfits, the claim that the IS-lites are significantly different from IS, and the US assertions that they are in some significant sense fighting IS.

It can be stated that al-Nusra further moves away from proposed new rebels and gradually enters the orbit of the Caliphate. The logic of war will continue to push the most radical factions into an Alliance with “black banners”.

He does distinguish between the "Pro-Western rebels" and Al-Nusra, mainly because Al-Nusra is a disciplined and effective (however evil) fighting force while the various FSA groups are not.

I don't know about Cassad's coverage of Syria. (I speak as a loyal reader of his DNR/LNR pieces). It seems he accepts too uncritically the idea of a "Free Syrian Army" independent of Jabhat al-Nusra and the other IS-lite outfits, the claim that the IS-lites are significantly different from IS, and the US assertions that they are in some significant sense fighting IS.

This seems to be his view:

It can be stated that al-Nusra further moves away from proposed new rebels and gradually enters the orbit of the Caliphate. The logic of war will continue to push the most radical factions into an Alliance with “black banners”.

He does distinguish between the “Pro-Western rebels” and Al-Nusra, mainly because Al-Nusra is a disciplined and effective (however evil) fighting force while the various FSA groups are not.

I quite agree with your astute summary of what has transpired, but why does the U.S. wish to destroy secular Arab governments? Is it an Israeli strategic preference, believing the replacement medieval jihad scum are more manageable due to their inherent incompetence, or is it romantic stupidity: Bush believing in the religion of peace and that the desire for freedom is written on every human heart, Barry Hussain Soetero remembering fondly his boyhood years in an Indonesian madrasa? It's utter folly and ignorance, either way.

but why does the U.S. wish to destroy secular Arab governments? Is it an Israeli strategic preference, believing the replacement medieval jihad scum are more manageable due to their inherent incompetence

A very pertinent question. Israel’s strategic preferences made sense based on their threat experience:

Ragtag arab jihadis are preferable to secular arab nationalists. Thus the focus on Saddam and Assad instead of al-Qaeda and ISIS.

Sunni jihadis backed by the Saudis are preferable to shia jihadis backed by Iran.

The sunni monarchies of the arabian peninsula, of Saudi Arabia and Jordan in particular, are far more preferable to the shia theocracy of Iran.

Putin’s entry into Syria to defend the secularist Assad, with the shias of Iran and Iraq as allies, has seriously scrambled the situation and Israel is now forced to rethink it’s strategic preferences.

"Sunni jihadis backed by the Saudis are preferable to shia jihadis backed by Iran."
Only until a power balance is restored and until Iran sinks into total anarchy. Eternal warfare between Muslim denominations is the eternal Israeli plan.

"The sunni monarchies of the arabian peninsula, of Saudi Arabia and Jordan in particular, are far more preferable to the shia theocracy of Iran."
Only because they are paying for the creation of the current chaos in the religiously mixed countries of the ME. Also, they share with Israel the dependence on the US weaponry, although Israel never pays whilst the absolutist dictatorial theocratic monarchies pay very well. Both Israel and these monarchies would come tumbling down without the US muscle.

When the US started the second attack on Iraq, I was thinking that they will eventually have to attack Iran, to restore the power balance that Israel needs.

Well. You are right about Israel's strategic preferences re the mayhem in Syria (and in the Middle Easy at large) when "strategic references" mean, among others, an open theft:

"On October 8, into the second week of Russian airstrikes against ISIS and other so-called “moderate” terrorists at the request of the Assad government, Yuval Bartov, chief geologist from Genie Energy’s Israeli subsidiary, Afek Oil & Gas, told Israel’s Channel 2 TV that his company had found a major oil reservoir on the Golan Heights: “We’ve found an oil stratum 350 meters thick in the southern Golan Heights. On average worldwide, strata are 20 to 30 meters thick, and this is 10 times as large as that, so we are talking about significant quantities.”
This oil find has now made the Golan Heights a strategic “prize” that clearly has the Netanyahu government more determined than ever to sow chaos and disorder in Damascus and use that to de facto create an Israeli irreversible occupation of Golan and its oil. A minister in the Netanyahu coalition government, Naftali Bennett, Minister of Education and Minister of Diaspora Affairs and leader of the right-wing religious party, The Jewish Home, has made a proposal that Israel settle 100,000 new Israeli settlers across the Golan in five years. He argues that with Syria “disintegrating” after years of civil war, it’s hard to imagine a stable state to which the Golan Heights could be returned. Further a growing chorus in Tel Aviv is arguing that Netanyahu demand American recognition of Israel’s 1981 annexation of the Golan as an “appropriate salve to Israeli security concerns in the wake of the nuclear deal with Iran.”
http://journal-neo.org/2015/10/26/genies-and-genocide-syria-israel-russia-and-much-oil-2/
Millions of innocent human beings have been suffered in the Middle East by the neocons' grandiose (lunatic) designs; the US treasury is empty for the pleasure of protecting "Israel's strategic preferences." Here are the words of Michael ledeen, the leading US Zionist/neocon and founding member of the Jewish Institute for National Security:
“Stability is an unworthy American mission, and a misleading concept to boot. We do not want stability in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and even Saudi Arabia; we want things to change. The real issue is not whether, but how to destabilize.” [Wall Street Journal, 9/4/2002]

but why does the U.S. wish to destroy secular Arab governments? Is it an Israeli strategic preference, believing the replacement medieval jihad scum are more manageable due to their inherent incompetence

A very pertinent question. Israel's strategic preferences made sense based on their threat experience:

Ragtag arab jihadis are preferable to secular arab nationalists. Thus the focus on Saddam and Assad instead of al-Qaeda and ISIS.

Sunni jihadis backed by the Saudis are preferable to shia jihadis backed by Iran.

The sunni monarchies of the arabian peninsula, of Saudi Arabia and Jordan in particular, are far more preferable to the shia theocracy of Iran.

Putin's entry into Syria to defend the secularist Assad, with the shias of Iran and Iraq as allies, has seriously scrambled the situation and Israel is now forced to rethink it's strategic preferences.

“Sunni jihadis backed by the Saudis are preferable to shia jihadis backed by Iran.”
Only until a power balance is restored and until Iran sinks into total anarchy. Eternal warfare between Muslim denominations is the eternal Israeli plan.

“The sunni monarchies of the arabian peninsula, of Saudi Arabia and Jordan in particular, are far more preferable to the shia theocracy of Iran.”
Only because they are paying for the creation of the current chaos in the religiously mixed countries of the ME. Also, they share with Israel the dependence on the US weaponry, although Israel never pays whilst the absolutist dictatorial theocratic monarchies pay very well. Both Israel and these monarchies would come tumbling down without the US muscle.

When the US started the second attack on Iraq, I was thinking that they will eventually have to attack Iran, to restore the power balance that Israel needs.

this site unz is supposed to be a " Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media."

OK, fine. Yes, SOME of the articles here do indeed fit that description. But really this site has only two types of articles, for the most part: 1) articles that deal with immigration and political correctness and how the liberals like them and are hypocrites about those two areas, and 2) middle east foreign affairs.

What about all the other stuff? And why are there so many articles about middle eastern foreign policy stuff here? I almost guarantee you that most of these articles are written by authors who get paid to write those sorts of articles.

Here are some interesting areas that almost NEVER get written about: why is there this huge political apartheid in american politics? What I am talking about is how the liberal political tribe is not allowed to say anything at all negative about affirmative action and mass immigration. And how the conservative political tribe is not allowed to say anything good about social security or medicare or nationalized healthcare.

It is a certifiable FACT that the vast majority of americans like social security and medicare and would NEVER want to have them abolished. The GOP politicians will not vote against them. Carson just said something about abolishing medicare, and I guarantee you his candidacy will end as soon as people actually start voting because of what he said. But no one in the media will admit it.

But there is hardly ever anything in the media about this rigidly enforced ideological apartheid. Why is no one talking about this? And hardly anyone ever reads or comments on this middle eastern policy articles here on this site. But every day there are more of them. Same thing for the media when it comes to foreign policy news. Hardly anyone really cares about it, but the media keeps cramming it down our throats.

As far as I am concerned there are no sites anywhere that really get into the really interesting issues.

And I have to wonder why.

The existence of these “inexplicables” in the West is indeed remarkable. Merkel, Cameron, Hollande, the Swedish trolls, and Obama invariably choose to favor foreigners over their “own” people and refuse to take the simplest of defensive measures against all immigration to the end that their nations are transformed and then destroyed.

The reason I read articles about Syria in particular is that the mantra “Assad must go” is manifestly absurd. Similarly, it’s clear that our bombing of ISIS has been a charade and that our support for moderate terrorists in Syria is fatuous.

Accordingly, it is useful to understand the big picture if we pay attention to what those who are controlling things say and do in Syria. The US and Europe are empty spectacles of representative government and this can be made clear by studying the imperial mindset in operation on the “fringes.”

but why does the U.S. wish to destroy secular Arab governments? Is it an Israeli strategic preference, believing the replacement medieval jihad scum are more manageable due to their inherent incompetence

A very pertinent question. Israel's strategic preferences made sense based on their threat experience:

Ragtag arab jihadis are preferable to secular arab nationalists. Thus the focus on Saddam and Assad instead of al-Qaeda and ISIS.

Sunni jihadis backed by the Saudis are preferable to shia jihadis backed by Iran.

The sunni monarchies of the arabian peninsula, of Saudi Arabia and Jordan in particular, are far more preferable to the shia theocracy of Iran.

Putin's entry into Syria to defend the secularist Assad, with the shias of Iran and Iraq as allies, has seriously scrambled the situation and Israel is now forced to rethink it's strategic preferences.

Well. You are right about Israel’s strategic preferences re the mayhem in Syria (and in the Middle Easy at large) when “strategic references” mean, among others, an open theft:

“On October 8, into the second week of Russian airstrikes against ISIS and other so-called “moderate” terrorists at the request of the Assad government, Yuval Bartov, chief geologist from Genie Energy’s Israeli subsidiary, Afek Oil & Gas, told Israel’s Channel 2 TV that his company had found a major oil reservoir on the Golan Heights: “We’ve found an oil stratum 350 meters thick in the southern Golan Heights. On average worldwide, strata are 20 to 30 meters thick, and this is 10 times as large as that, so we are talking about significant quantities.”
This oil find has now made the Golan Heights a strategic “prize” that clearly has the Netanyahu government more determined than ever to sow chaos and disorder in Damascus and use that to de facto create an Israeli irreversible occupation of Golan and its oil. A minister in the Netanyahu coalition government, Naftali Bennett, Minister of Education and Minister of Diaspora Affairs and leader of the right-wing religious party, The Jewish Home, has made a proposal that Israel settle 100,000 new Israeli settlers across the Golan in five years. He argues that with Syria “disintegrating” after years of civil war, it’s hard to imagine a stable state to which the Golan Heights could be returned. Further a growing chorus in Tel Aviv is arguing that Netanyahu demand American recognition of Israel’s 1981 annexation of the Golan as an “appropriate salve to Israeli security concerns in the wake of the nuclear deal with Iran.”

Millions of innocent human beings have been suffered in the Middle East by the neocons’ grandiose (lunatic) designs; the US treasury is empty for the pleasure of protecting “Israel’s strategic preferences.” Here are the words of Michael ledeen, the leading US Zionist/neocon and founding member of the Jewish Institute for National Security:
“Stability is an unworthy American mission, and a misleading concept to boot. We do not want stability in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and even Saudi Arabia; we want things to change. The real issue is not whether, but how to destabilize.” [Wall Street Journal, 9/4/2002]

Here are the words of Michael ledeen, the leading US Zionist/neocon and founding member of the Jewish Institute for National Security:
“Stability is an unworthy American mission, and a misleading concept to boot. We do not want stability in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and even Saudi Arabia; we want things to change. The real issue is not whether, but how to destabilize.” [Wall Street Journal, 9/4/2002]

Besides being inhumane and immoral these orchestrators of chaos are also stupid and short-sighted, having only succeeded in making things worse for themselves. ISIS is gaining converts in Gaza, the West Bank and within Israel (among the israeli arabs). Russia and Iran are now engaged in battle across the border in Syria fighting for the opposite side. Dangerous times lie ahead...

Btw, looting the wealth and creating socio-economic chaos in Russia during the buffoon Yeltsin's rule must also have been on the agenda of these neocons. Probably as revenge for the Soviet Union's arming and training the secular, arab nationalist regimes who waged wars against Israel. Ditto for creating the chaos in Ukraine which resulted in Putin taking back Crimea and which probably also played a role in Putin's decision to intervene militarily on the side of it's old secular Baathist ally in Syria.

Well. You are right about Israel's strategic preferences re the mayhem in Syria (and in the Middle Easy at large) when "strategic references" mean, among others, an open theft:

"On October 8, into the second week of Russian airstrikes against ISIS and other so-called “moderate” terrorists at the request of the Assad government, Yuval Bartov, chief geologist from Genie Energy’s Israeli subsidiary, Afek Oil & Gas, told Israel’s Channel 2 TV that his company had found a major oil reservoir on the Golan Heights: “We’ve found an oil stratum 350 meters thick in the southern Golan Heights. On average worldwide, strata are 20 to 30 meters thick, and this is 10 times as large as that, so we are talking about significant quantities.”
This oil find has now made the Golan Heights a strategic “prize” that clearly has the Netanyahu government more determined than ever to sow chaos and disorder in Damascus and use that to de facto create an Israeli irreversible occupation of Golan and its oil. A minister in the Netanyahu coalition government, Naftali Bennett, Minister of Education and Minister of Diaspora Affairs and leader of the right-wing religious party, The Jewish Home, has made a proposal that Israel settle 100,000 new Israeli settlers across the Golan in five years. He argues that with Syria “disintegrating” after years of civil war, it’s hard to imagine a stable state to which the Golan Heights could be returned. Further a growing chorus in Tel Aviv is arguing that Netanyahu demand American recognition of Israel’s 1981 annexation of the Golan as an “appropriate salve to Israeli security concerns in the wake of the nuclear deal with Iran.”
http://journal-neo.org/2015/10/26/genies-and-genocide-syria-israel-russia-and-much-oil-2/
Millions of innocent human beings have been suffered in the Middle East by the neocons' grandiose (lunatic) designs; the US treasury is empty for the pleasure of protecting "Israel's strategic preferences." Here are the words of Michael ledeen, the leading US Zionist/neocon and founding member of the Jewish Institute for National Security:
“Stability is an unworthy American mission, and a misleading concept to boot. We do not want stability in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and even Saudi Arabia; we want things to change. The real issue is not whether, but how to destabilize.” [Wall Street Journal, 9/4/2002]

Here are the words of Michael ledeen, the leading US Zionist/neocon and founding member of the Jewish Institute for National Security:
“Stability is an unworthy American mission, and a misleading concept to boot. We do not want stability in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and even Saudi Arabia; we want things to change. The real issue is not whether, but how to destabilize.” [Wall Street Journal, 9/4/2002]

Besides being inhumane and immoral these orchestrators of chaos are also stupid and short-sighted, having only succeeded in making things worse for themselves. ISIS is gaining converts in Gaza, the West Bank and within Israel (among the israeli arabs). Russia and Iran are now engaged in battle across the border in Syria fighting for the opposite side. Dangerous times lie ahead…

Btw, looting the wealth and creating socio-economic chaos in Russia during the buffoon Yeltsin’s rule must also have been on the agenda of these neocons. Probably as revenge for the Soviet Union’s arming and training the secular, arab nationalist regimes who waged wars against Israel. Ditto for creating the chaos in Ukraine which resulted in Putin taking back Crimea and which probably also played a role in Putin’s decision to intervene militarily on the side of it’s old secular Baathist ally in Syria.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-deciders/
The chaos was scrupulously planned over the years by the neocons.
Now they want to comeback and try it again-
http://lobelog.com/neocons-launch-2016-manifesto/ . They are demanding the GOP to allow them in under the all American Flag of the self anointed status of being the indispensable country.

and Schumer gets heavily compensated for steadfast support to the doctrines of unfolding and never ending chaos -http://lobelog.com/schumer-opposes-iran-deal-receives-90000-from-aipac-ally/

Here are the words of Michael ledeen, the leading US Zionist/neocon and founding member of the Jewish Institute for National Security:
“Stability is an unworthy American mission, and a misleading concept to boot. We do not want stability in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and even Saudi Arabia; we want things to change. The real issue is not whether, but how to destabilize.” [Wall Street Journal, 9/4/2002]

Besides being inhumane and immoral these orchestrators of chaos are also stupid and short-sighted, having only succeeded in making things worse for themselves. ISIS is gaining converts in Gaza, the West Bank and within Israel (among the israeli arabs). Russia and Iran are now engaged in battle across the border in Syria fighting for the opposite side. Dangerous times lie ahead...

Btw, looting the wealth and creating socio-economic chaos in Russia during the buffoon Yeltsin's rule must also have been on the agenda of these neocons. Probably as revenge for the Soviet Union's arming and training the secular, arab nationalist regimes who waged wars against Israel. Ditto for creating the chaos in Ukraine which resulted in Putin taking back Crimea and which probably also played a role in Putin's decision to intervene militarily on the side of it's old secular Baathist ally in Syria.

The chaos was scrupulously planned over the years by the neocons.
Now they want to comeback and try it again-http://lobelog.com/neocons-launch-2016-manifesto/ . They are demanding the GOP to allow them in under the all American Flag of the self anointed status of being the indispensable country.

The fiction that the US hasn't won a war since WW2 appears to have been accepted as fact, it's not true. In Korea, North Korea invaded South Korea and was repelled, that is a victory. In the Vietnam War the US military won every battle and kept the South Vietnamese government in power until the US military withdrew. That is not a defeat, the North was attempting to overthrow the South and as long as the US remained engaged, the South remained a nation. Grenada and Panama can be dismissed, but they are still successful campaigns. As for the first Gulf War, Saddam's forces were forced to withdraw from Kuwait and were seriously damaged, that's a win. In Afghanistan, the government was overthrown and a satellite government set up by the US, another win. In the second Gulf War, the Iraqi government was destroyed, the military destroyed and another American puppet government installed, how is this not a victory? There may be guerrilla movements within the defeated nations, but until these movements gain power, they haven't defeated anyone, let alone the US.

Thanks for the laugh.
The US military are, of course such a useless bunch of tools that on half a trillion dollars a year, thet couldn’t defend their own headquarters against $12 worth of box-cutters.
What a bunch of tossers you are.

Here are the words of Michael ledeen, the leading US Zionist/neocon and founding member of the Jewish Institute for National Security:
“Stability is an unworthy American mission, and a misleading concept to boot. We do not want stability in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and even Saudi Arabia; we want things to change. The real issue is not whether, but how to destabilize.” [Wall Street Journal, 9/4/2002]

Besides being inhumane and immoral these orchestrators of chaos are also stupid and short-sighted, having only succeeded in making things worse for themselves. ISIS is gaining converts in Gaza, the West Bank and within Israel (among the israeli arabs). Russia and Iran are now engaged in battle across the border in Syria fighting for the opposite side. Dangerous times lie ahead...

Btw, looting the wealth and creating socio-economic chaos in Russia during the buffoon Yeltsin's rule must also have been on the agenda of these neocons. Probably as revenge for the Soviet Union's arming and training the secular, arab nationalist regimes who waged wars against Israel. Ditto for creating the chaos in Ukraine which resulted in Putin taking back Crimea and which probably also played a role in Putin's decision to intervene militarily on the side of it's old secular Baathist ally in Syria.

Agree absolutely.
The Khazar land thieves want chaos.
Thanks for the quote, I’ll be using it.

Thanks for the laugh.
The US military are, of course such a useless bunch of tools that on half a trillion dollars a year, thet couldn't defend their own headquarters against $12 worth of box-cutters.
What a bunch of tossers you are.

You didn’t refute his point. You must have concluded that he said the U.S. military is a perfect military

To Wizard of Oz:
Regarding Russia’s support of “rebels” in the east-south of Ukraine:
It is obvious how little analytics you have read. What Russia does in Donbass is that it prevents Russian speaking Ukrainians there from being killed by its own government.
Before you pass any judgement on any ethnic conflict, it would be advisable to familiarize yourself with its causes.
What was undemocratic in Donbass people’s desire to
1. Speak their own language (Russian)
2. To make Ukraine a federative state
3. To decentralize power and become more independent from Kyiv?
A lot of countries function on these principles. The new Ukrainian government, instead of listening to its citizens, sent tanks and the military to quash any disagreements, killing thousands of civilians and destroying all the infrastructure.
Stop believing the global presstitute, and hopefully, you will get a better vision of events.

The "new Ukrainian government" would never send "tanks and the military to quash any disagreements, killing thousands of civilians and destroying all the infrastructure" if not the very active support, and actually directives from the geniuses in DC. You are not the first (or second or third or fourth) who is trying to present WoO with facts re Ukraine (and, for that matter, re Syria); these facts are beyond the mental universe of WoO.

To Wizard of Oz:
Regarding Russia's support of "rebels" in the east-south of Ukraine:
It is obvious how little analytics you have read. What Russia does in Donbass is that it prevents Russian speaking Ukrainians there from being killed by its own government.
Before you pass any judgement on any ethnic conflict, it would be advisable to familiarize yourself with its causes.
What was undemocratic in Donbass people's desire to
1. Speak their own language (Russian)
2. To make Ukraine a federative state
3. To decentralize power and become more independent from Kyiv?
A lot of countries function on these principles. The new Ukrainian government, instead of listening to its citizens, sent tanks and the military to quash any disagreements, killing thousands of civilians and destroying all the infrastructure.
Stop believing the global presstitute, and hopefully, you will get a better vision of events.

The “new Ukrainian government” would never send “tanks and the military to quash any disagreements, killing thousands of civilians and destroying all the infrastructure” if not the very active support, and actually directives from the geniuses in DC. You are not the first (or second or third or fourth) who is trying to present WoO with facts re Ukraine (and, for that matter, re Syria); these facts are beyond the mental universe of WoO.

Excellent analysis! Many thanks to the author and to this website for disclosing the truth.
With more and more lies in the mainstream media (“the presstitute”), I do hope that the peoples of the world will turn away from the mendacious press and start looking for the truth themselves, as did I, who stopped buying the horrible propaganda lies.
The media magnates will soon realize that TRUTH has great power: it has the ability to reveal itself to people, first in a tiny stream, and then in a powerful flood that will overthrow all the satanists ruling our beautiful earth.

Leaving aside Catholic/Protestant vs Orthodox, Russia is more 'Western' than not Western I would say. Bashar Assad & the Ba'ath are a lot more 'Western' than US allies like the Saudi King & the Wahabbis.
I'd say that what we see is modern Civilisation fighting back against postmodern US-Wahabbi Barbarism.

Good comment. ‘US-Wahabbi Barbarism’, in my view, is not really postmodern, but medieval.

this site unz is supposed to be a " Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media."

OK, fine. Yes, SOME of the articles here do indeed fit that description. But really this site has only two types of articles, for the most part: 1) articles that deal with immigration and political correctness and how the liberals like them and are hypocrites about those two areas, and 2) middle east foreign affairs.

What about all the other stuff? And why are there so many articles about middle eastern foreign policy stuff here? I almost guarantee you that most of these articles are written by authors who get paid to write those sorts of articles.

Here are some interesting areas that almost NEVER get written about: why is there this huge political apartheid in american politics? What I am talking about is how the liberal political tribe is not allowed to say anything at all negative about affirmative action and mass immigration. And how the conservative political tribe is not allowed to say anything good about social security or medicare or nationalized healthcare.

It is a certifiable FACT that the vast majority of americans like social security and medicare and would NEVER want to have them abolished. The GOP politicians will not vote against them. Carson just said something about abolishing medicare, and I guarantee you his candidacy will end as soon as people actually start voting because of what he said. But no one in the media will admit it.

But there is hardly ever anything in the media about this rigidly enforced ideological apartheid. Why is no one talking about this? And hardly anyone ever reads or comments on this middle eastern policy articles here on this site. But every day there are more of them. Same thing for the media when it comes to foreign policy news. Hardly anyone really cares about it, but the media keeps cramming it down our throats.

As far as I am concerned there are no sites anywhere that really get into the really interesting issues.

And I have to wonder why.

What I am talking about is how the liberal political tribe is not allowed to say anything at all negative about affirmative action and mass immigration. And how the conservative political tribe is not allowed to say anything good about social security or medicare or nationalized healthcare.

Well immigration is for defeating labor and conservatives funding by business would dry up if they criticised it, so that leaves welfare for conservatives to complain about as if they represent the taxpayer. Private profit at the expense of the public subsidy of low wages is corporate welfare. Don’t expect business’s shills to claim credit for that.

@James Ennis: I don't dispute any of that. I don't have a horse in this race; I only support intellectual honesty and clarity of thought. I despise nationalism, be it British or Russian. Let us right-thinking folks come together to further the cause of transhumanism!

@geokat23: I have no time for Adorno or Marxism, but I like this particular idea, regardless of who has articulated it, and believe it can be usefully culled from its source, hence my rephrasing.

I have no time for Adorno or Marxism, but I like this particular idea, regardless of who has articulated it, and believe it can be usefully culled from its source, hence my rephrasing.

Wasn’t it also Adorno who was so appalled at Californians who wore shoes that did not tie that he hied himself back to Germany as soon as he was assured he could live there in comfort — and, presumably, acquire shoestrings.

Theodor Adorno. unambiguously authoritarian down to his shoestrings.

Gertrude Stein, on the other hand, remained in Europe throughout both periods of the unpleasantness. She even made herself useful to the victims of war as she performed ambulance duties.
Stein put a less authoritarian twist on Adorno’s dictum: She said, “A genius is someone who can contemplate two opposing ideas and still maintain his sanity.” (It’s claimed that Fitzgerald wrote the thought, but he heard it from Gertrude.)

Can you then imagine the wrath of the Muslims against the Zionist ? Can you imagine how long it will endure? 1917,1919,1947,1948,1956 1967,1982,1996,2003-2015 and the names like Yoded Yinon, PNAC FDD,AEI,ECI,David Project,Israeli Project, Iraq,Iran,Syria,Lebanon Liberation Act, Pamela Geller on NY transit, Wiesenthal Center , neoconservatives. Liberal Interventionists , and lining up Mufti against Hitler, and many more will stay with thir collective consciousness.

BTW. It was not so much the tortures of Jesus Christ that contributed to the angst of the Christian against the Jews ,as were the memory of the lies,tortures,distortions,and use of Roman power against the nascent Christianity ,subsequent corruption of the feudal elites by the Jews moneylenders ,and promoting wars between nations .
It needed a flag an anthem,a color code ,a story in one line to rally the masses against the oppressive Jewish elite . It achieved that in the phrase- Christ Killer. It is time to unpack it . The hatred was not religious . It was about survival .

Behind all the religious invectives of the Muslim against the Jewish, also lie same developmental process . It is not about religion .
It is the history. This also wil be reset .

Putin doesn't have to worry . There has been millions men march against Bush war in Europe Asia ,Africa and even in US and Canada.
Have you seen one yet in London or Cairo or Jakarta?

A few million Jews have made a few hundred million Arabs look stupid…big news, a few million Africans would probably make them look stupid.

A few million Jews have made a few hundred million Arabs look stupid...

If this were simply about one people damaging another people's image, your remark would be funny. But we're talking about the death of hundreds of thousands, if not over a million people... and you find that something to mock as "big news"?

A few million Jews have made a few hundred million Arabs look stupid...big news, a few million Africans would probably make them look stupid.

A few million Jews have made a few hundred million Arabs look stupid…

If this were simply about one people damaging another people’s image, your remark would be funny. But we’re talking about the death of hundreds of thousands, if not over a million people… and you find that something to mock as “big news”?

Use of multiple, non-Anonymous handles for commenting on this webzine is strongly discouraged, and your secret (real or fictitious) email allows you to authenticate your commenter-identity, preventing others from assuming it, accidentally or otherwise.

Therefore, keeping your Name+Email combination is important, and the 'Remember' feature saves it for you as a cookie on your device/browser.

Also, activating the 'Remember' feature enables the Agree/Disagree/LOL/Troll buttons on all comments.

Email Replies to my Comment

Body of Comment

Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter